The council president opposed the six-minute proposal, arguing that five minutes was sufficient. This stance was met with opposition from another council member, who advocated deferring the ordinance vote due to the potential impact of upcoming elections on council membership. The council president criticized the suggestion, labeling it as a “red herring” and stressing that any reduction in speaking time could punish residents who regularly participate in meetings. A roll call vote on the ordinance resulted in a split decision, with the motion ultimately failing as a majority opposed its introduction.

In a related discussion, the council considered a second ordinance that would allow rebuttal time during public comments. This measure aimed to give residents the chance to respond to others’ remarks, thus creating a fuller discourse on issues. However, concerns were raised about possible confusion if public members were permitted to rebut one another, leading to another divided vote and the ordinance’s rejection.

Beyond public speaking time, the council addressed amendments to regulations surrounding electric scooters. These amendments imposed safety requirements such as prohibiting hitching to other vehicles, mandating lights for nighttime visibility, and necessitating a bell for alerting pedestrians. Penalties for violations were discussed, with first offenses resulting in parental warnings and subsequent offenses incurring fines.

The council also engaged in A discussion on Edison’s affordable housing obligations. A resident raised concerns regarding the town’s decision to litigate rather than engage in dispute resolution with the Department of Community Affairs (DCA). Edison’s own housing obligation calculation fell short of the DCA’s requirements, leading to legal battles with several developers. The resident questioned the financial and strategic prudence of the town’s approach, noting the court’s ruling against Edison and the ongoing risk of builders remedy lawsuits.

Another member called for innovative solutions to manage housing requirements, such as purchasing deed restrictions to extend low-income status.

Public engagement continued with discussions on various community matters, including the organization and funding of a Diwali fireworks event. Residents inquired about the event’s budget and traffic management plans, which were addressed with assurances of established traffic protocols and available information on the township’s website. Concerns about unauthorized fireworks and the enforcement of related ordinances were also raised.

The meeting concluded with discussions on infrastructure improvements, particularly the repaving of Amboy Avenue, which was slated for spring. Residents expressed frustration over delayed projects and the lack of communication regarding street sign repairs and lighting issues. The council reiterated the use of a Q alert system for reporting such concerns, promising to address them promptly.