The special meeting, called on a holiday week, was centered on the future of Block 170 Lot 2. Councilwoman Nancy Taggart Davis outlined a comprehensive list of aesthetic and building material requirements for the redevelopment agreement, which would be provided to the Land Use Board. The agreement stipulates that any changes must be approved by the council. The council discussed the need for an overlay or to supersede zoning to prevent residential developments, ultimately passing a motion to adopt the Redevelopment agreement with a majority vote, with Mayor Colleen Lambert casting the dissenting vote.

Councilwoman Catherine Snyder questioned the need for such an accelerated meeting. Mayor Colleen Lambert responded to these concerns, expressing her disappointment in the perception of the council’s actions and assuring that there was no personal agenda influencing the decision. The meeting’s timing was a point of contention for Councilwoman Jaime Baumiller as well, who voiced her disagreement with the urgency but acknowledged the majority’s approval of the meeting schedule.

The debate over the specifics of the redevelopment plan brought to light various concerns, with Councilwoman Kitty Auerbach inquiring about the materials for the sidewalk, lighting, and the guarantee of The Fosters’ project closure. Emily, another attendee, clarified that the adoption of the Redevelopment plan would serve as the best assurance for the property’s future by superseding the previous zoning. Despite the diverse opinions on the council regarding the timing of the meeting, the redevelopment plan’s details were thoroughly discussed and clarified.

The public comment section of the meeting further highlighted the community’s concerns. Attendees debated the urgency of the meeting and the impression of a lack of progress, with some expressing confusion and others feeling deceived. Deb Whitcraft raised worries about the conditions of one property being contingent on concessions made at another. Bill Hudson, a local business owner, defended his right to contribute to the discussion, emphasizing the impact of his customers on Beach Haven.

Amidst the public discourse, another resolution was passed to authorize an executive session to discuss ongoing litigation, including Beach Haven Automotive Inc versus the borough and Beach Haven versus Holiday Snack Bar. The contingent nature of the agreements and the perceived lack of transparency in the council’s decision-making process were central themes during the public comments. Despite the debate, the council encouraged the attendees to support local businesses and wished everyone a Happy Thanksgiving. The meeting concluded with an executive session that attendees were invited to stay for, with the public and executive sessions adjourned thereafter.