One of the most heated topics was the ongoing debate over zoning regulations for gasoline stations with convenience stores. Nino Gorga, a representative from the Valero gas station on Lincoln Avenue, voiced his concerns about the proposed ordinance’s implications for his business. Gorga detailed his frustrations with the building department’s lack of communication, which he felt left him unaware of the need for a use variance in converting a garage into a convenience store. Expressing his dissatisfaction, Gorga remarked, “I don’t understand… I can sell motor oil… but I can’t sell a cup of coffee. It doesn’t make sense to me.” He underscored the struggles his business faces in remaining viable, lamenting that the ordinance changes seemed to advantage larger entities over smaller, local businesses, stating, “this ordinance… does not help small businesses; it makes way for the big box stores to come in and do whatever they want.”

The council members acknowledged these challenges and engaged in discussions about potentially amending the ordinance to accommodate dual use for gas stations in the B1 zone. One council member recommended that instead of making gas stations conforming, dual use should be permitted.

In another contentious matter, resident Ronald Vogo raised concerns about the borough’s handling of zoning permits and property modifications, particularly regarding a neighboring property’s retaining wall. Vogo alleged that changes to his property contour were made without the necessary permits, claiming that the construction activities diminished his property’s value. He shared his frustration, stating, “The more I dig the deeper the hole gets,” suggesting a deepening dissatisfaction with the borough’s regulatory processes. Vogo presented documentation to the council. He questioned whether the zoning department had properly advised the neighboring property owner on the required permits and engineering considerations, quoting a code official who allegedly refused to sign off on the construction.

A council member responded by explaining that a notice of violation had been issued to the adjacent property owner for the unpermitted wall construction, though it was later dismissed by the County Construction Board of Appeals. The council member maintained that the borough had acted within its authority, stating, “We looked at the situation, we issued a notice of violation…we couldn’t do more than that.” Despite these assurances, Vogo remained unconvinced. He also shared personal anecdotes about the stress the situation had caused, impacting both his health and personal life, and hinted at potential legal action if necessary.

A resident expressed dissatisfaction with the costs associated with service line replacements, though the council clarified that state mandates necessitated the adjustments, resulting in a 9% increase instead of the initially projected 133%. The council emphasized their efforts to maintain competitive rates compared to neighboring towns.

In addition, an ordinance to install stop signs at additional locations was presented, though it received no public comment. The council also reviewed a bond ordinance for improvements at the Wager Road Fields, noting financial backing through grants to make the bleachers ADA accessible. The administrative agenda included recognition for Councilman Frank Matthews’ 20 years of service, along with reminders about upcoming community events and traffic safety.