Public Meetings - Edison, New Jersey

The combined work session and regular meeting of the Edison Township Council was held on August 26, 2026, at 7:00 PM. The meeting featured a presentation by the Water and Sewer Utility clarifying its obligations to private developments, followed by extensive public comment from Victoria Park residents regarding a water leak and billing disputes. The council also addressed a dispute over towing subcontracting, appointed an acting municipal clerk, and acted on various resolutions. Consent Calendar - Approved minutes of the June 26, 2026 work session meeting. - Approved three volunteer firefighters. - Introduced Ordinance 2285-2026 (amending Chapter 17, residential rental units) with a public hearing set for September 9, 2026. - Adopted the consent agenda with separate votes on Resolutions 465 and 467. Public Comments & Testimony - On Resolutions: A resident questioned the collision repair contract (Resolution 465) and asked for vendor reports. Another questioned tax sales certifications and redevelopment agreements. The resolution for Menlo Manor (Item 10B) was tabled due to insufficient documentation. - Towing Dispute: Scott Flowers, owner of Scott's Towing and an authorized township vendor, alleged that a competitor (Falco's) subcontracts 99% of its calls, violating the towing ordinance. He stated that the ordinance prohibits subcontracting but lacks penalty clauses. Council attorney cautioned the council against taking a position without full context. Councilman Brescher noted that the issue could be resolved by checking vehicle plates on police reports. Council President Coyle said a letter would be sent to the administration to review the matter. - Water Utility & Victoria Park Leak: Multiple residents from Victoria Park (Hanna Road, Victoria Court) spoke at length. They argued that the Edison Water Utility's own website and municipal code (Section 27-2.15) place responsibility for service lines up to the curb stop on the utility. They noted that the leak in question is on a ¾-inch line (less than the 2-inch exception) and that the utility had previously repaired similar leaks at no cost in 2023 and 2025. Residents requested immediate repair of the ongoing leak (active since at least January 2026) and reversal of chargebacks issued to homeowners. Council President Coyle stated that the issue may become a court matter and that the council could not order the utility to act. Several residents also raised concerns about fire hydrant flushing, traffic safety at Ethel Road/Talmadge and Victoria Court intersections, and support for current acting clerk Marlena. - Other Public Comments: Joyce Nutsbum (Friends of the Edison Public Library) announced a 5K run fundraiser on October 11, 2026. A resident questioned the cost of a 24-hour furlough. Another resident criticized the council's handling of Marlena's appointment. A veteran asked for recognition of deployed military personnel and better pay for service members. Discussion Items - Water Utility Presentation: Director Stephen Bloyd, with supervisors Roger Frida and Bat Dara, presented a slideshow showing that the utility's responsibility ends at the curb stop for private developments (HOAs, condos, apartments). Ordinance 27-2.15 was read: the utility maintains lines from the water main to the curb stop; property owners are responsible for lines beyond. Council members questioned the ongoing leak at Victoria Park (Ethel Road side). Councilman Kentos noted that the leak has been running for months, wasting water from the township reservoir. Councilman Brescher argued that the township should install meters at the curb for all HOAs to track water loss and bill accordingly. Councilman Katel asked about sewer line responsibility (similar, except for pump stations owned by the township). Council President Coyle said the council would investigate past practices and the possibility of a separate utility board. - Acting Municipal Clerk Appointment: Resolution 467 appointed Heidi Peck as acting municipal clerk for one year. Council President Coyle noted that Peck was the only qualified candidate besides Marlena (the current acting clerk). Councilman Brescher moved to postpone the appointment until October to allow Marlena to take the clerk exam, arguing that it was unfair to bring in a new person for a year. The motion to postpone failed, and the resolution passed 6-1, with Councilman Brescher voting no. Council President Coyle stated that the two would work as a team and that Marlena's compensation would be increased in steps. - Police Vehicle Repair Contract: Resolution 465 amended a previous contract for collision repairs, increasing the not-to-exceed amount by $36,000. Councilman Brescher requested vendor reports listing vehicles and damages, which the business administrator agreed to provide. The resolution passed unanimously. - Other Items: Resolution 449 (Menlo Manor agreement) was tabled due to lack of documentation. A resolution for 979 Amboy Avenue (Item 10B) was pulled from the agenda. The council discussed the need for a redevelopment agency and economic development hiring. Key Outcomes - Votes: Consent agenda adopted. Resolution 465 (police vehicle repair) approved 7-0. Resolution 467 (acting clerk) approved 6-1 (Brescher no). Ordinance 2285-2026 introduced unanimously. - Water Utility: Council agreed to investigate past practices, fire hydrant flushing, and installing meters at HOA curb stops. Council President Coyle stated that the council would not order the utility to make repairs on private property but would apply pressure on the administration. The issue of the Victoria Park leak may require litigation to resolve boundary responsibilities. - Traffic Safety: Council requested that the administration evaluate Ethel Road/Talmadge intersection and Victoria Court for traffic safety improvements, including consideration of a blinking stop sign (solar-powered) at Brotherhood and Victoria Park. - Towing Ordinance: Council will send a letter to the administration to review the subcontracting allegations and consider ordinance amendments. - Meeting Extension: The meeting was extended by 10 minutes to accommodate public comments. - Next Steps: The council will continue to investigate the water utility issues and hold a separate meeting if needed. The public hearing for Ordinance 2285-2026 is set for September 9, 2026.

The Edison Township Zoning Board of Adjustment held its regular meeting on August 25, 2026, at 7:00 PM in the Council Chambers. The board considered six applications, including three for single-family home variances, two for public utility infrastructure upgrades, and one for a religious-use amendment. Several cases were carried over from prior hearings. The board denied two applications and approved four, with votes reflecting careful deliberation on safety, neighborhood character, and statutory criteria. Consent Calendar - Minutes Approval: The minutes of July 7, 2026, and July 28, 2026, were approved unanimously via roll call. - Resolution Approvals: Resolutions Z-15-2026 (Swan Nujan) and Z-53-2019 (American Outdoor Ford Denial) were adopted unanimously. Announcements - Case Z-31-2025 (Tanujia Adiani): Carried to October 13, 2026, at 7:00 PM. - Case Z-8-2024 (Ultimate Collision): Carried to November 24, 2026, at 7:00 PM. Public Comments & Testimony - Sacred Foundation (Z-8-2025) – Public Hearing Portion: Approximately 15 residents spoke, split between supporters (many from the Hindu community seeking a closer temple) and opponents (primarily from the adjacent Park Gate condominium community). Opponents emphasized safety hazards from wrong-way traffic on Park Gate Drive, citing personal near-accidents and a photograph showing a vehicle exiting the wrong lane. Supporters argued the temple is a small tenant (2,800 sq. ft.) and offered to voluntarily avoid using the north entrance, with conditions including signage and a six-month look-back. The board heard that the original approval (October 2025) required the north entrance to remain permanently closed; the applicant sought to amend that condition. Several residents noted that the traffic conflict is a landlord-tenant issue, not a zoning matter. Discussion Items - Case Z-2-2026 – Emma Craw (194 Washington Ave): Minor subdivision with bulk variances for two single-family homes. Attorney Thomas Barlow summarized that the proposal fit the neighborhood of undersized, nonconforming lots. The board's motion to disapprove cited failure to meet positive/negative criteria and zoning standards (minimum lot 7,500 sq. ft., width 75 ft., etc.). Vote: 6–1 (denied). - Case V-10-2026 – Middlesex Water (83): D6 height variance for a 10-foot height increase (to 55 ft.) for a silo and building at water treatment plant. Attorney Richard Skolnick argued the project is driven by federal/state PFAS mandates and is an inherently beneficial use. Testimony covered stormwater improvements, parking, and tree coordination. Vote: Unanimous (approved). - Case Z-6-2026 – Rajesh Kumar Patel (96 Overbrook Ave): Bulk and use variances to demolish an existing home and build a new two-story dwelling. Variances included FAR (proposed 55.4% vs. 40% max), lot coverage (27.5% vs. 23%), front yard setbacks (6 ft. on Briar, 21 ft. on Overbrook). Applicant’s planner Paul Fletcher noted improvements from prior application (reduced FAR from 59.4% to 55.4%). The applicant agreed to cap FAR at 0.50 as a condition. Vote: Unanimous (approved). - Case Z-14-2026 – Priyang Patel (37 Gurley Road): Bulk and use variances for a new two-story home with one-car garage. Variances: FAR 0.487 (max 0.44), height 32.5 ft. (max 32 ft.), lot coverage 27% (max 23%), rear yard 22.9 ft. (min 30 ft.), lot area 7,111 sq. ft. (min 7,500). Planner John DuPont testified the lot is undersized and irregular, and the new home will match recent nearby constructions. Vote: Unanimous (approved). - Case Z-11-2026 – NJ American Water (2160 Oak Tree Road): Use variance and site plan to expand an existing booster pump station (non-conforming use in OSRC zone). Engineer Joseph Bon Giovanni testified the project involves 635 sq. ft. increase (building to 1,600 sq. ft.) and minimal impervious coverage (938 sq. ft. increase). Planner McKinley Mertz classified the use as inherently beneficial, meeting positive criteria, and concluded no negative impacts due to heavy buffering and 575-ft. setback from residences. Vote: Unanimous (approved). Key Outcomes - Denied: Z-2-2026 (Emma Craw) – Motion to disapprove by Vice Chair O’Gorman, seconded by Schneider; vote 6–1 (no only from Mr. Sadaha). - Approved: V-10-2026 (Middlesex Water) – Motion by Vice Chair O’Gorman, seconded by Siddata; unanimous. - Denied: Z-8-2025 (Sacred Foundation) – Motion to deny by Vice Chair O’Gorman, seconded by Schneider; vote 6–1 (no from Mr. Johnny). - Approved: Z-6-2026 (Rajesh Patel) – Motion by Mr. Chabra, seconded by Schneider; unanimous with condition FAR ≤ 0.50. - Approved: Z-14-2026 (Priyang Patel) – Motion by Vice Chair O’Gorman, seconded by Siddata; unanimous. - Approved: Z-11-2026 (NJ American Water) – Motion by Vice Chair O’Gorman, seconded by Cerrito; unanimous.

On August 17, 2026, the Edison Township Planning Board met but lacked a quorum because its regular members were conflicted out of the main application. The Zoning Board, seated in place of the Planning Board, heard Case P08 2026, 14 Mercer Street, and approved a minor three-lot subdivision with a private driveway variance. Adequate notice under the Open Public Meetings Act had been provided by the annual notice published and posted on December 4, 2025. All routine items and other pending cases were carried to future meetings. Consent Calendar / Carry-Overs - No minutes, resolutions, miscellaneous items, or extension requests were approved; they were carried to the next month. - Case P04 2026, 44 Lincoln Highway, was carried to September 14, 2026, with no re-notice required. - Case P07 2024 (amended), 135 Whitman Renewal LLC, 135 Whitman Avenue, was carried. - Case P06 2026, Raron Plaza 3, LLC, 105 Fieldcrest, was carried with no notice. - Case P07 2026, Narali Patel, 2116 Oak Tree Road, was carried with no re-notice required. Public Comments & Testimony - John Hickey, 18 Lombardi Street, said he circulated a petition and presented 39 signatures; he stated that 62 percent of homes within 200 feet signed it. He opposed the subdivision, citing stormwater runoff, increased impervious coverage, loss of privacy and sunlight, density, private-road noise and lighting, and emergency-access concerns. The board attorney said the petition itself could not be accepted because the signers were not sworn, but Mr. Hickey's sworn testimony could be considered. - Hagid Lassan, a Lombardi Street resident, opposed the application, arguing the private road would effectively become a public road, property values and living conditions would be harmed, and the notice and documents were difficult to obtain before the hearing. Board staff said the notice was mailed August 5 and met the 10-day deadline; the attorney added that each future application would be judged on its own merits and this decision would not set a binding precedent. - Kathy Hickey, 18 Lombardi Street, asked how emergency vehicles would access a gated private driveway. The applicant said the gate would include sensors or transponders that open for emergency vehicles. - Michelle Timpco, formerly of 6 Lombardi Street and now of Colonia, opposed the plan, saying the surrounding streets already cannot handle traffic and that the cited 1671 Woodland Avenue precedent was distinguishable because that area had more green space. She argued the proposal was a private benefit rather than a public safety benefit. - Hai Chao Wong, 12 Lombardi Street, asked about the mayor's influence given the conflict. The attorney explained that the regular Planning Board members were appointed by the mayor and were recused, while the Zoning Board members are selected by the council; completeness review for this application had been outsourced to Carteret. - Mary Davis, 21 Lombardi Street, asked how runoff increases would be avoided. The applicant said roof drainage would be directed to an existing on-site drain, and he planned more than 100 Green Giant arborvitae around the property to absorb water and provide privacy. - Jing Wang, 60 Lombardy Street, cited state fire-code and site-improvement statutes and questioned emergency-vehicle access. The chairman responded that the engineer had certified the 20-foot private driveway would meet minor collector road standards and accommodate emergency vehicles; the attorney said compliance would be a condition of approval. - Carl Davis, 21 Lombardi Street, asked why the applicant did not simply dedicate the extension as a public road. The applicant said a public road would not allow a private gate. Mr. Davis also described worsening neighborhood flooding and asked whether the promised trees could be made a condition. The board proposed requiring trees every 5 feet along the perimeter. Discussion Items - Case P08 2026, listed as Niati Shah, 14 Mercer Street, was heard with Sam Joshi testifying as the applicant. Mr. Joshi said he grew up about 890 feet from the property, recently purchased it, and planned to build his family home there. He stated he was requesting no use variances; the only variance issue was a private driveway instead of a public roadway. - Engineer Paul Fletcher, a licensed professional engineer and planner with about 32 years as principal of Fletcher Engineering, testified that the 0.881-acre property, containing 38,366.82 square feet, would be divided into three lots: 18,055.22 square feet, 10,267.67 square feet, and 10,043.93 square feet. The plan includes demolition of the existing structures, a 20-foot-wide shared private driveway within a 30-foot easement, and lots intended to meet RBB zone bulk standards. He said the application needed a planning variance under N.J.S.A. 40:55D-35 for lack of frontage on a public right-of-way, plus design waiver relief, and he cited the prior 1671 Woodland Avenue approval, Case P5255, as precedent. - Board Engineer Charles Carly reviewed his August 11, 2026 report and testified the project would create minimal trip generation, involve less than one acre of disturbance, and not meet major-development stormwater thresholds. The planning report supported granting the variance under the C2 criteria. Mr. Fletcher cited benefits including conforming residential lots, additional housing, and no taxpayer cost for maintaining the private road, and he saw no significant detriment to the zone plan or master plan. - Board members asked about lot width and depth measurement, confirmation with the township tax assessor, and emergency-vehicle access. Mr. Fletcher confirmed the driveway would be 20 feet wide with restricted parking and would safely and efficiently accommodate emergency vehicles. He also agreed to conditions regarding the access easement and maintenance. Key Outcomes - The public portion was closed by a motion from Mr. Schneider, seconded by Mr. Chabra. - Vice Chair Gorman moved to approve the application, seconded by Mr. Chabra, with conditions: arborvitae trees planted every 5 feet along the property perimeter; the private driveway maintained by the owner and coordinated with the township engineer and attorney; and any changes to the approved plan, even de minimis changes, requiring a new or amended approval. - The roll call vote was 6-0 in favor, with Mr. Johnny, Mr. Cerrito, Mr. Chabra, Mr. Schneider, Vice Chair Gorman, and Chairman Cumba voting yes. The application was approved. - All other agenda items and pending cases were carried to the next meeting, and no minutes or resolutions were adopted.

This special meeting, held on August 3, 2026 at 6:00 p.m., was convened to adopt the 2026 calendar year budget and solid waste budgets. The meeting followed a previous cancellation due to lack of quorum. After a public hearing, the council voted on the budget and several resolutions, including redevelopment items. Multiple residents and union representatives spoke about budget concerns, furloughs, tax increases, and land-use issues. Consent Calendar - Approval of minutes from July 10, 2026 was moved and seconded, passed unanimously. - Resolution 289 (Safe Street to School Contract) was passed; $300,000 contract with Remington Vernick, 80% grant-funded. - Resolution 411 (bleachers) and 415 (fences) were adopted as part of consent agenda. - Resolution 403 (financial management services with Government Strategies) was approved. - Resolution 416 (community block grant funds) passed. - Several other routine resolutions were adopted without separate discussion. Public Comments & Testimony - John Pointer questioned the $5 million utility surplus allocation, bonding projects, and surplus replenishment. The BA stated that the sewer utility would remain self-liquidating and surplus would stay around $15 million. - Thomas Lecky urged the town to reduce spending and combine services; criticized the sports facility cost overrun from $5 million to $18 million. - Margot Harris (Cultural Arts Commission) requested a dedicated line item; BA noted a trust account exists but no funding yet. - Gurbindar Dhamija asked about the budget process and questioned whether the council can remove line items, limit overtime, and control vendor extensions. Council President Coyle and BA explained council authority and contractual obligations. - Elizabeth Conway criticized the lack of transparency in tax bills and the furlough threat, calling it a “sin.” She demanded a better explanation of the budget. - Joel Bassoff praised the budget for not cutting public safety but condemned the administration for spreading rumors about layoffs. He questioned why the budget was submitted two and a half months late. - Octor Nasser asked about starting budget preparation earlier, the T3 and T4 temporary appropriations, and expressed confusion over council’s control vs. mayor’s role. He suggested using a form for council questions. - Patrick Durick (Polanski Park Restoration Society) proposed cutting expenses for pocket parks to save money. - Dr. Aishad Hakar also spoke against spending on Polanski Park, calling it a waste. - Valen Martini (summer camp) asked why furloughs happened mid-pay period and when refunds would be issued. BA said part-time staff would be paid in the next pay period and refunds would be addressed in August council meeting. - Joyce Freeman questioned retread tires and requested clearer location details on resolution items. - Sue Malone Barber opposed the redevelopment study for properties on Amboy Avenue (1021 and 1027), calling it spot zoning. She urged the council not to approve the study. - Karen Halo asked about redevelopment and whether council members can buy into developments they approve; the attorney confirmed conflict-of-interest rules. - Raj Nagarajan praised the council and mayor but urged an end to political games, noting that furloughs were unprecedented and eroded trust. Discussion Items - Budget Debate and Amendments: Councilmember Brescher proposed a $300,000 cut from the fuel line item, arguing savings could go to surplus. The BA noted fuel costs had risen 46% in 2026, making the cut risky. The attorney stated that a cut exceeding 10% would require a new public hearing. The amendment failed for lack of a second. - Redevelopment Resolutions: - R417 (979 Amboy Avenue): Extended the redevelopment agreement by 24 months, requiring an affordable housing component (20%) and a $150,000 sidewalk contribution. After public comment, the council voted to table this item to August 26, 2026. - R418 (10 Brunswick Avenue): Proposed a redevelopment study. Councilmember Kentos raised unanswered questions; motion to table failed, then the main motion to adopt failed. - R435 (1021 and 1027 Amboy Avenue): Proposed a redevelopment study. Despite opposition from residents who argued it would circumvent the 2024 ordinance, the resolution passed 4-3 (in favor: Dima, Patel, Schmuel, Coyle; opposed: Brescher, Kentos, Petil). - Final Budget Adoption: The council voted on the 2026 budget with a 6-1 result (Brescher dissenting). The budget includes a municipal tax increase of 4.45%. Key Outcomes - 2026 Budget Adopted (6-1): Brescher voted no. The budget includes a 4.45% municipal tax increase. Adjustments from the prior temporary budget will appear on November 1, 2026 tax bills. - Solid Waste Budget Adopted (unanimous). - R417 (979 Amboy Avenue): Tabled to August 26, 2026. - R435 (Amboy Avenue redevelopment study): Approved 4-3. - R418 (10 Brunswick Avenue redevelopment study): Failed. - Furloughs and Refunds: The administration confirmed that part-time summer camp staff will be paid in the next pay period and parent refunds for two missed camp days will be processed at the August council meeting. - Tax Bill Issue: Residents who did not receive an estimated tax bill were advised to contact the tax collector; the top line amount on the website represents a 5% estimate. - Future Budget Process: Council agreed to begin budget preparation earlier (September 2026) to avoid delays. The BA will provide quarterly surplus reports to the finance committee.

The Township of Edison Zoning Board of Adjustment held a regular meeting on July 28, 2026, starting at 7:00 PM. The board considered multiple applications, including a bulk variance for a residential addition, a major subdivision and variance case for two new homes, a proposal for a water treatment facility upgrade to meet new federal PFAS standards, and an amendment to a prior approval for a religious use. Several cases were carried to the August 25, 2026 meeting due to only five voting members present. Consent Calendar - Minutes of the June 30, 2026 meeting were approved unanimously. - Resolution Z5-2026 (PSE&G) approved unanimously. - Resolution Z9-2026 (Sharon's Patel) approved unanimously. - Resolution for Jeremy Genethel approved unanimously. - Case Z6-2026 (Rajash Kumar Patel at 96 Overbrook Avenue) was found to be improperly noticed and will be re-noticed for a future date. Public Comments & Testimony - Case Z15-2026 (Swan Nugent): One resident (Tan Ryan, 49 Stony Road) spoke in support of the application. No other public comments. - Case Z2-2026 (Emmerprit qua quan): Multiple residents within 200 feet and beyond testified in opposition. Key concerns included drainage and flooding on Highland Avenue, increased traffic and parking congestion, setting a precedent for subdividing conforming lots on Washington Avenue, and potential negative impacts on water runoff and groundwater. Speakers included Al Canon Freund (178 Washington Ave), Michael Willinger (173 Highland Ave), David Eisner (69 Miniola Place), Elisa Morla (65 Miniola Place), Jenna Freund (178 Washington Ave), Sylvia Toronda (152 Highland/230 Washington), Charles Newstead (Highland Ave), Abraham Gruber (161 Highland Ave), David Itskowitz (83 Marshall Drive), and Asaf Schmuel. Many noted that their own lots are 50x100 undersized and objected to creating more such lots. - Case Z10-2026 (Middlesex Water): One resident, Joan Giles (76 Fairview Avenue), spoke in opposition. She expressed concerns about tree removal (96 trees removed, replaced with smaller trees), dust from construction, and the fact that her neighborhood does not receive Middlesex Water service, questioning the benefit of the project. She also argued that the 200-foot notice radius was insufficient for a project of this scale. - Case Z8-2025 (Sacred Foundation): Several residents of the Park Gate community spoke in opposition to removing the condition closing the north entrance. Speakers included Elena Siniasky (26 Carriage Place), Robert Yannazzo (27 Carriage Place), Dr. James Hanlon (82 Park Gate Drive), Louis Weh (3895 Park Avenue), Rinky Singh (47 Gatehouse Lane), and Nicholas Vezard (45 Park Gate Drive). They cited safety concerns, near-miss accidents, confusion for drivers, increased traffic, and the prior board's decision to protect public safety. One speaker questioned notification procedures. The Park Gate Condominium Association's attorney, Damon Cress, also argued against the amendment. Discussion Items Case Z15-2026: Swan Nugent – Bulk Variance for Rear Addition at 47 Stony Road Applicant Tuan Wen requested a bulk variance to add a rear addition and deck to accommodate his elderly parents. Variances needed: building coverage from 23% to 33% and deck coverage from 4% to 5.5%. Exhibits included elevation drawings and photos of comparable homes. Adjacent neighbor submitted a letter of support. The board found the proposal met positive and negative criteria and was consistent with neighborhood characteristics. Vice Chairman O'Gorman moved to approve; motion seconded and passed unanimously. Case Z2-2026: Emmerprit qua quan – Minor Subdivision and Bulk/Use Variances at 194 Washington Ave Applicant sought to subdivide a 100x100 lot into two 50x100 lots, each with a new single-family home. Variances needed for lot area (5,000 sq ft vs 7,500 sq ft required), lot width (50 ft vs 75 ft), front yard setback (19 ft vs 25 ft for a porch), building coverage (28.8% vs 23%), and FAR (0.55 vs 0.44). Attorney Thomas Barlow presented testimony from planner/engineer John DuPont, who showed that 77% of lots within 200 feet are undersized and that the FAR variance was less intense than many multi-family homes in the area. The applicant noted the existing home is decrepit. Public testimony raised concerns about drainage, parking, and precedent. After public input, the board carried the case to August 25, 2026 for a vote, as only five members were present. Case Z10-2026: Middlesex Water – Site Plan for PFAS Treatment Facility at 83 Fairview Ave & 300 Cedar Lane Middlesex Water Company proposed constructing a 58,360 sq ft building and a 55-ft-tall silo (vs 45 ft max) to treat water for PFAS (forever chemicals) to meet new federal standards of 4 parts per trillion. The project is an inherently beneficial use. Expert witnesses: Brian Carr (VP of Engineering) explained the need for granular activated carbon and powdered activated carbon treatment; Dave Tanzi (civil engineer) detailed site layout, height requirements due to deep contactors, and a new secondary access road off Cedar Lane to minimize truck traffic on Fairview Avenue; planner Lorelei Totten testified that the height variances would not substantially impair the zone plan and that the site can accommodate the extra height given its 25-acre size and buffers. Tree removal: 96 trees removed, 128 new ones planted. Public comment raised concerns about tree size, dust, and lack of direct benefit to Fairview residents. The case was carried to August 25, 2026 for a vote due to only five members present. Case Z8-2025: Sacred Foundation – Amendment to Condition at 3880 Park Ave Sacred Foundation sought to amend condition 3A of its October 2025 approval (which required permanent closure of the Park Gate Drive access) because the landlord (who owns the building) cannot close the gate due to a recorded easement and the need for barrier-free access to medical tenants. Applicant proposed a substitute: prohibiting all temple-related traffic from using Park Gate Drive, with enforcement measures including signage and a six-month compliance lookback. Attorney Bob Smith presented the proposal. Public testimony strongly opposed any removal of the closure condition, citing safety and traffic hazards. The case was carried to August 25, 2026 for continuation and decision. Key Outcomes - Case Z15-2026: Approved unanimously (5-0). The applicant may proceed with the rear addition and deck. - Case Z2-2026: Carried to August 25, 2026 at 7:00 PM in council chambers. No further notice will be sent. - Case Z10-2026: Carried to August 25, 2026 at 7:00 PM in council chambers. No further notice will be sent. - Case Z8-2025: Carried to August 25, 2026 at 7:00 PM in council chambers. No further notice will be sent. - The board also held a closed session regarding Care One litigation (Z46-2017) with no action reported. - Meeting adjourned after the last case.

The Edison Township Council held a special meeting on July 23, 2026, to vote on emergency appropriations (Resolutions 401-072026 and 402-072026) needed to restore funding for township operations and reverse furloughs. The meeting came after the regular meeting on July 20 failed to pass a temporary budget, leading to the furlough of 10 police officers and many other employees. Council President Joe Coyle emphasized that the vote was only for temporary spending, not the full budget, which is scheduled for August 3, 2026. After public comments, amendments, and debate, both resolutions were passed, and all furloughed employees were to be reinstated with back pay. Consent Calendar - Resolution 401-072026 (emergency appropriation covering council, mayor, administration salaries, and other operating expenses) and Resolution 402-072026 (sanitation budget) were considered together on the consent agenda. - Before adoption, an amendment to strike council salaries and wages ($14,250.06) from Resolution 401 passed (4-3). An amendment to strike mayor salaries failed (3-4). After these votes, the consent agenda was adopted unanimously (7-0). Public Comments & Testimony - Margo Harris (43 Oak Hills Road) asked whether the temporary budget would run through the end of the month; administration clarified it covers the pay period ending July 22 through August 5. - Thomas Lucky (Netherwood Circle) expressed support for the appropriation but urged the council to withhold their own salaries and the mayor's until the budget passes. - Peter Andrew (President, New Jersey State PBA) requested the council approve funding to return all furloughed officers, provide complete information on any proposed additional furloughs, and meet promptly with the union. He stated that 10 officers had already been furloughed and that removing officers does not eliminate public safety needs. - Michael Coyne (DPW/Teamsters 469) pleaded for passage to avoid the town becoming national news and to keep essential services running. - Dan Boslett (resident) heavily criticized the three council members who did not attend the July 20 meeting and called the situation “deplorable.” He urged passage and future budget cuts. - Diana Joffey (on behalf of former councilman Tony Masaro) read a statement saying the council should vote based on facts and noted that cutting $755,000 would save each taxpayer only one penny. - Jamie Goldman (resident, attorney, and realtor) expressed fear that furloughs make Edison unsafe and that the chaos would discourage new residents. - Jim Walsh (President, Edison Fire Fighters Association) urged passage, noting that firefighters remain understaffed and that the budget is now the council's responsibility. - Lola [Lilith] (AFSME Local 3269 President) stated that 94% of her membership was furloughed, affecting many lesser-known departments. She insisted on restoring services. - Gulbender Demija (Denser Just Road) called for waste reduction and resident control over budgets, citing a $500 monthly copier rental as an example of waste. - Andrew Benjavanga (resident) supported immediate passage and thanked the council. - Maria Orchid (Chair, Human Relations Commission) criticized the proposed 4.5% tax increase and noted that recreation and senior services were furloughed. - Janice Roberts (new resident) asked why requested information on easy pass and fuel was not provided earlier and whether summer camp days closed would be refunded. - Brian Kilajansky (resident, firefighter, nurse) urged the council to know funding deadlines and improve communication to prevent future crises. Discussion Items - Council President Coyle clarified that the meeting was only for emergency appropriations, not the full budget, and that the regular budget vote is August 3. - Councilmember Brescher moved to amend Resolution 401 to strike council salaries and wages, stating the council collectively failed to reach a budget agreement. The amendment passed 4-3 (Brescher, Kentos, Patel, Petil yes; Dima, Schmuel, Coyle no). - A subsequent motion to strike mayor salaries failed 3-4 (Brescher, Kentos, Petil yes; Patel, Dima, Schmuel, Coyle no). - Councilmember Brescher also requested detailed easy pass and fuel records dating back to the prior administration, promising to withhold votes until received. The administration agreed to provide unredacted reports. - Councilmember Patel stated he was not feeling well on Monday and had surgery on Tuesday, but attended because the vote was critical. He emphasized he never intended to harm employees and would vote for the budget on August 3. - The Business Administrator (BA) and CFO explained that the surplus is approximately $4 million and that emergency appropriations require council authorization. They noted that all council members had been provided with financial documents for five months. - Council President Coyle argued that the temporary appropriations are a routine practice and that the council's failure to pass them on Monday was unusual. He criticized the mayor for sounding the alarm only seven days before funds ran out. Key Outcomes - Resolution 401-072026 was amended to zero out council salaries and wages for the temporary period (motion passed 4-3). - The amendment to remove mayor salaries failed (3-4). - Both Resolutions 401 and 402 were then adopted via consent agenda on a unanimous 7-0 vote. - All furloughed employees are to be reinstated the next day (July 24) and will receive back pay for the days missed. - The next budget meeting is scheduled for August 3, 2026, where council members may propose further amendments to the full budget.

The Edison Township Council held a combined work session and regular meeting on July 20, 2026, primarily to adopt the 2026 municipal and solid waste budgets. However, due to the absence of three council members and the subsequent departure of Councilman Brescher, the budget vote was postponed. The meeting opened with a resolution recognizing Tourette Syndrome Awareness Day, followed by discussion on the budget, a bamboo ordinance, and review of consent agenda items. The meeting adjourned without final action on the budget, and a special meeting was scheduled for August 3, 2026. Consent Calendar - A resolution recognizing June 4th as Tourette Syndrome Awareness Day in Edison Township was adopted unanimously after a public comment period. Councilman Brescher and another speaker shared personal connections to Tourette syndrome and advocated for awareness. - The council reviewed the consent agenda for resolutions under Department of Finance, Health, Public Works, Planning & Engineering, and Recreation. No votes were taken on these items as the meeting lost quorum. Public Comments & Testimony - Two speakers addressed the council in support of the Tourette Syndrome Awareness Day resolution. One speaker, with a personal connection to Tourette syndrome, described the disorder's prevalence and comorbid conditions, and thanked the council for recognition. No other public comments were made. Discussion Items - Budget Discussion: Councilman Brescher expressed dissatisfaction with the budget, stating he had not received requested information on fuel and EasyPass costs for take-home cars, and argued that cuts could avoid furloughs. Council President Coyle and others defended the budget, noting the 4.4% tax increase equates to about $130 for an average homeowner, and that cuts would reduce future surplus. They emphasized public safety and services were maintained. Councilman Brescher indicated he would not vote for the budget without the requested data. - Bamboo Ordinance: An ordinance regarding bamboo regulation was tabled after discussion. Councilman Brescher raised concerns about enforcement and liability for pre-existing bamboo. The item was tabled to the September meeting to allow for amendments. - Amboy Avenue Redevelopment Study: Councilman Brescher queried the process for designating an area in need of redevelopment. The Business Administrator explained the planning board study and report process. Councilman Brescher expressed frustration about slow redevelopment timelines, citing the Ford plant area. - Top Golf Tax Appeal: A settlement for Top Golf tax appeal was discussed, totaling $593,000 over seven years (2019-2026). Key Outcomes - Tourette Syndrome Resolution: Adopted unanimously. - Bamboo Ordinance: Tabled until the September 2026 meeting. - Budget Vote Postponed: The 2026 municipal budget and solid waste budget were not voted on due to lack of quorum. Council President Coyle stated the administration would be forced to issue furloughs if the budget is not passed by month's end. A special combined meeting was scheduled for August 3, 2026, at 6:00 p.m. to reconsider the budget. - Meeting Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 7:36 p.m. without action on remaining agenda items due to loss of quorum after Councilman Brescher left.

The Edison Planning Board convened on July 13, 2026, at 7:00 PM (approximate start) to consider two site plan applications, approve minutes and resolutions, and carry over two cases. The meeting included public testimony, particularly on the second application, which drew significant opposition from nearby residents. The board voted to approve both applications with conditions. Consent Calendar - Minutes: Approved the minutes of the May 18, 2026 meeting by unanimous roll call vote. - Resolution P03-2026 – Hackensack Meridian Health JFK: Preliminary and final site plan approval granted unanimously. - Resolution – Township of Edison DPW Municipal Garage: Capital improvements resolution approved unanimously. Cases Carried Over - Case P04-2026 – Torsiela Organization (44 Lincoln Highway): Carried to August 17, 2026, with no re-notice required. - Case P07-2024 – Amended 135 Whitman Avenue: Carried to August 17, 2026, with no re-notice required. Discussion Items Case P05-2026 – DOCA Cabinet LLC (2 Skylar Drive) - Applicant: Richard Skolnik, representing DOCA Cabinet LLC, seeking preliminary and final site plan approval for a two-story mixed-use building (first floor kitchen showroom, second floor office and three-bedroom apartment). No variances requested. - Testimony: - Michael Roth (civil engineer): Site is 0.25 acres, vacant. Proposed building footprint 3,200 sq ft, total building area 6,000 sq ft (revised to 5,343 sq ft in May 28 letter). Building coverage 29.3% (max 40%), impervious coverage 74.4% (max 80%). Parking: 11 spaces required, 12 provided (including one handicapped and one garage space). Access from Skylar Drive; two existing curb openings on Route 27 will be removed. Stormwater drywell proposed; LSRP certification requested for infiltration. Compliance with board professionals' review letters. - Fred Schmidt (architect): Building design inspired by neoclassical style, similar to Hmart across the street. Materials: stone veneer, hardy board, stucco. HVAC units shielded by parapet. Apartment separate entrance, basement for storage/utilities only. - Victor Lee (project manager): Showroom for cabinet display; no fabrication on site. Two employees, hours 9-5/6. Office upstairs for business records and calls. - Public Comments: None. - Key Outcomes: Motion to approve with conditions: (1) upstairs office exclusively for downstairs business; (2) letter from LSRP (or engineer Roth's certification) confirming infiltration system appropriate; if not, alternative plan approved by board engineer; (3) compliance with all review letters. Unanimous vote (7-0). Case P11-2023 Amended – Yash Raj Realty LLC (39 Thomas & 1371 Route 1) - Applicant: Tim Arch, representing Yash Raj Realty, seeking amended preliminary and final site plan approval for an age-restricted residential building. Originally approved in 2023 for 48 units with 85 parking spaces (including subterranean parking). Now acquiring adjacent former gas station lot to add surface parking, improve circulation, and increase units to 51 with 90 parking spaces. Building footprint slightly elongated (community room corner). - Testimony: - John DuPont (engineer/planner): New plan provides 90 parking spaces (51 under building, 39 on new lot). Eliminates subterranean parking, improves circulation. Three deviations requested: (1) minimum lot size on lot 8.03 (15,375 sq ft) – will be resolved upon lot consolidation; (2) impervious coverage on lot 8.03 – resolved by consolidation; (3) parking setback 4 ft from property line (adjacent to Route 1 ramp, not residential). Compliance with board professionals' review letters. EV-ready spaces increased from 4 to 14 (15% of required). ADA spaces increased to 4. Affordable housing 20% set-aside (UILAC requirements). - Satyan Rawal (architect): Building is four-story, age-restricted, with zero-step entry, ADA compliant. Materials: dark brick, hardy board, stucco. Community room on ground floor. HVAC screened by parapet. Lighting: 3,000 Kelvin LED. - Public Comments (in opposition): - Debra Fulton (39 Elbert Ave): Shocked by project; would not have bought house if known. Concerns about parking overflow, emergency vehicle access, noise, sanitation. - Albert Moda (52 Albert Ave): Longtime resident; neighborhood under attack from commercial vehicles, traffic, enforcement failures. Feels project will destroy quality of life. - VJ Solanke (79 Thomas St): Peaceful neighborhood; project will cause traffic and noise; strongly opposed. - Christine Lunoz (8 John St): House directly in front of vacant lot; concerned about parking, privacy, noise. - Jan Casmar (33 Albert Ave): 68-year resident; upset about lack of prior notice. Worries about dementia residents wandering onto Route 1, accidents, garbage, infrastructure. - Patricia Siselak (22 Elmwood Ave): 60-year resident; neighborhood already congested; emergency vehicles unable to pass; property values will decline; buffer not sufficient; sewer capacity concerns. - Jungbu Shao (30 Albert Ave): 100% agrees with neighbors; four-story building is a nightmare; loss of peace and quiet. - Public Comments (in support): - Dev Johnny (46 Auburn Ave): Supports redevelopment to deter illegal activity; will make area safer for kids. - Nilish Jani (46 Albert Ave): 25-year resident; current vacant lot is dirty and run-down; redevelopment would be positive. - Namrita Janny (46 Albert Ave): Hopes building will reduce truck activity and improve safety. - Key Outcomes: Motion to approve with conditions: (1) lot consolidation (deed recorded with county); (2) compliance with affordable housing requirements (number and distribution of units per UILAC); (3) compliance with all review letters; any further changes require board approval. Unanimous vote (7-0). Key Outcomes - P05-2026 DOCA Cabinet LLC: Approved unanimously with conditions (office use, LSRP infiltration approval, compliance with review letters). - P11-2023 Amended Yash Raj Realty LLC: Approved unanimously with conditions (lot consolidation, affordable housing compliance, adherence to review letters). - Meeting adjourned after all business completed.

The Township of Edison Zoning Board of Adjustment held a special meeting on July 7, 2026, at 7:00 PM in the council chambers. The board heard two major applications: a continuation of Case Z8-2024 for Ultimate Collision involving bulk and use variances for car lifts, and a Whispering Woods hearing for Case Z46-2017 regarding a proposed 114-unit memory care facility by Care One at Birchwood. The meeting included sworn testimony from professionals, public comments, and a final vote on the Care One settlement. Case Z8-2024: Ultimate Collision (1115 U.S. Route 1) - Applicant: Ultimate Collision, represented by attorney Skip Shah. Owner Gerald McNee testified that the business has operated at the site for 26 years and faces longer repair times (average 24–25 days vs. 7–10 days previously) due to insurance delays and parts shortages. - Proposal: Approval for 22 exterior car lifts (already installed), two sheds, and two trailers (removed). Variances sought include a D2 use variance for expansion of a non-conforming use, front yard setback, building coverage (25.8% vs. 25% limit), and a 10-foot fence (12-foot originally requested, reduced per board engineer). - Expert Testimony: - William Lane (Menlo Engineering, P.E.): Presented plans for the lifts, generator, and fence. Under cross-examination, he stated the lifts are not anchored but rest on asphalt; he would agree to a condition requiring board approval for any relocation. Board members expressed concerns about lift stability and soil bearing capacity. - Charles Deeds (architect): Described enclosing an existing roof-level area with glass storefront and a coiling door for temperature control and security. - John McDonough (planner): Argued the proposal is a site betterment, visually innocuous, and meets positive criteria for a D2 variance. He supported the application contingent on soils analysis and fire chief compliance. - Board Comments: - Members questioned the need for 22 lifts, the structural safety of unanchored lifts on asphalt, fire truck access, and the adequacy of landscaping. - The board required a subsoil analysis and fire department plan before voting. The case was carried to August 25, 2026 at 7:00 PM, with no further notice to the public. - No vote taken on this application; continued pending additional information. Case Z46-2017: Care One at Birchwood (1350 Inman Avenue) – Whispering Woods Hearing - Background: This hearing arose from a settlement of litigation after the board denied a 106-bed assisted living facility in 2019–2020. A federal court found the denial violated the Fair Housing Act (disparate impact on disabled/elderly). The proposed settlement modifies the application to a 114-unit (122-bed) memory care facility. - Applicant’s Presentation: - Attorney Peter Flannery and litigation counsel Bruce Nagel presented. Civil engineer Brian Weisner (Langan Engineering) testified that the building height was reduced to two stories on the east side (closest to Lewis Court) and services (generator, trash) moved to the west side. Building coverage would be 17.4% (exceeds 15% limit), lot coverage 43.2% (vs. 30%), and FAR 0.305 (vs. 0.25). 104 parking spaces proposed. - Architect Michael Pomarico (45 years healthcare experience) described security features (access control on each floor, egress prevention) and stated the use is licensed as assisted living, not a separate use. He confirmed the building is designed per 2022 guidelines for assisted living. - Objectors’ Arguments: - Attorneys Richard Leahy (for resident Kevin Cattell) and Ron Gazarowski (for resident Amadel Syale) argued that notice was insufficient (published only 10 days in advance, over July 4th holiday), the settlement improperly relies on testimony from the denied original application, and the board lacks jurisdiction because the original use was denied and only 45 days allowed for challenge. - They also contended that memory care is a new use requiring a fresh application, and that the board’s professionals (engineer and planner) had inadequate time to review the materials. - Public Comments (approximately 15 speakers, each 5 minutes): - Residents of King Street, Lewis Court, and Inman Avenue expressed opposition citing: traffic congestion, safety risks for children walking/biking, noise from generators and trucks, environmental concerns (wetlands, flood risks), and visual impact. Several noted that the plan merely moves nuisances from east to west, not solving problems. - Speakers said they received notice late and had no access to the settlement agreement before the meeting. Many requested a postponement for full public review. - Board Discussion: - Board planner Ms. Knight noted she received the application materials late and could not incorporate prior hearing testimony. Her report focused on clarification items. - Vice Chairman O’Gorman made a motion to deny the application, stating positive and negative criteria were not met, the application undermines residential zoning, insufficient planner testimony, and drawings were not signed/sealed. The motion was seconded by Mr. Chopper. - Vote: The board voted unanimously (9-0) to deny the Whispering Woods settlement and related land use approvals. All members present voted in favor of the motion. - Members: Mr. Schneider, Mr. Chopper, Mr. Salmon, Mr. Johnny, Mr. Patel, Ms. Knight, Mr. Cerrito, Vice Chair O’Gorman, and Chairman Cumber. - Consequence: The denial means litigation will proceed to trial, with the applicant stating damages could reach $40 million, covered by the township’s insurance carrier. Key Outcomes - Case Z8-2024 (Ultimate Collision): Continued to August 25, 2026, pending soils analysis and fire department approval. No final vote. - Case Z46-2017 (Care One): Unanimous denial (9-0) of the settlement agreement and all related variances and site plan approvals. The matter will return to federal court for trial on the merits.