The central debate at the meeting revolved around the town’s master plan and whether it should undergo a thorough reexamination or a full rewrite. The board expressed concerns about working against an outdated master plan and the confusion that might arise from not having a consolidated document.

During the discourse, the significance of the master plan as a living document was a recurring theme. Members of the board deliberated on how the plan should evolve, considering whether the 1991 master plan should continue to be updated incrementally or if starting anew would be more beneficial. The need to address and incorporate the recommendations made in the 2016 reexamination, particularly those related to zoning and development regulations, was acknowledged as a priority.

In addressing these concerns, the board planned to involve the new borough administrator, Christopher York, in the process. The intention is for York to provide insights on the master plan process going forward. Additionally, the decision was made to invite planners and the borough engineer to the next meeting to offer their expertise and recommendations on the best course of action. The input of these professionals is expected to guide the board on best practices for either reexamining or rewriting the master plan.

Another topic of note was the need to consolidate the town’s planning documents into a single, more coherent framework. The board discussed various strategies for achieving this consolidation, including dividing the work by topic areas or assigning specific elements to individual members. The timeline for completing the final draft of this consolidated document was proposed with a deadline of June 2026. Recognizing the importance of public engagement in the planning process, the board emphasized the necessity of transparent communication with residents and stakeholders.

The board also considered the town’s financial constraints and explored the possibility of securing grants to support sustainable growth initiatives.

Public engagement strategies formed another focal point of the meeting, as board members debated the most effective ways to gather input from residents. Various methods were discussed, including surveys, open houses, and workshops. The importance of consulting with the Department of Public Works was highlighted, with an emphasis on considering changes in circulation and infrastructure that could be incorporated into the master plan.

A resident and former professional in planning and landscape architecture, identified as Tracy, contributed to the discussion by stressing the value of a comprehensive and forward-looking master plan. Tracy differentiated the master plan from the reexamination report, advocating for a vision that encapsulates both immediate and long-term goals for the community.

As the meeting progressed, the board grappled with the guiding philosophy of the 1991 master plan, assessing its relevance and the extent of changes over the years.