During the public comments section, residents voiced their concerns about the attorney’s approach to the lawsuit, which involves the proposed rapid establishment of a school using existing buildings on the property. Critics argued that the attorney overlooked issues such as traffic safety, water concerns, and flooding, which occur frequently in the area. One resident highlighted that flooding happens “68 times a year when it rains,” emphasizing the significance of these issues to the community.

Residents were particularly upset by claims made by Pasc Valley representatives, who suggested that objections to the development were based on animosity rather than valid community concerns. This assertion was interpreted by residents as an accusation of religious discrimination, which they found offensive and misrepresentative of their genuine objections. They criticized the town’s attorney for not challenging these claims vigorously enough during the conference call.

The community’s frustration extended to the perceived willingness of a “slim majority” of town council members to settle the case quickly, as suggested by the attorney. Concerns were raised about this settlement approach, with residents emphasizing that the focus should be on the implications of the proposed development rather than the identity of the applicant. Discrepancies in the project’s land requirements were also highlighted, with the applicant failing to meet the five-acre minimum requirement.

Further dissatisfaction was expressed by residents like Lorraine Robertson, who questioned the validity of the applicant’s claims of hardship, arguing that these were self-created and that invoking religious status was a tactic to overturn the zoning board’s decision. She and others insisted that the town’s actions conformed to local and state laws and that any suggestion of burdening religious exercise was unfounded.

Adding to the concerns, Alex Barascus criticized the attorney for not informing the council about the hearing and underscored the importance of community participation in defending the town’s interests. He emphasized that residents have a role in questioning applicants and should not be seen as out of line for doing so.

Patty Den raised a critical point about the decision-making process involving the town’s insurance company, questioning who ultimately holds the authority over the legal strategy in the lawsuit. She acknowledged the financial implications of aggressively defending the case, noting that it would impact taxpayers.

As the meeting continued, the council explored other matters, such as the Route 23 sewer extension appraisal report and its associated costs. This project, originating in 2016, has been a significant undertaking for the council, with a total cost of approximately $6.9 million. After a public hearing on the special assessor’s report, where no public comments were made, the council unanimously approved a resolution confirming the assessments.

In addition, the council discussed a proposal for a bicycle pump track by a resident, Dana Reese. Reese highlighted the lack of safe biking options for children in Pequannock and suggested that a pump track could provide a safe recreational space, potentially benefiting local businesses by attracting visitors. The council showed interest in exploring this proposal further during the upcoming budget season.

Other administrative matters included discussions on various ordinances and resolutions. The council unanimously approved ordinances related to the elevation of flood-prone homes through FEMA grants and the establishment of membership fees for pickleball and tennis courts at Green View Park. They also addressed financial challenges in the Wells 1 and 2 treatment project, revealing a $213,000 deficit due to increased costs.

Lastly, the council celebrated the completion of the pickleball courts, which have been well-received by the community. The ribbon-cutting event drew positive feedback, emphasizing the importance of community facilities in enhancing residents’ quality of life.