One of the primary topics of discussion was the proposed construction of Well 11, which aims to replace the problematic Well 10. This new well is part of a two-phase project that includes a test well to qualify for low-interest or no-interest loans and grants. A representative from an engineering firm presented the project details, emphasizing the need for a test well to assess water quality and specific capacity. The test well is planned for a property on North Ocean Avenue, strategically chosen to avoid the water quality issues that plagued Well 10.

Residents expressed skepticism about the plan. Concerns were raised about the costs associated with the new well, which could exceed $2 million, as well as the potential $5 million cost of a filtration system for Well 10. One resident emphasized the necessity of understanding the full financial implications, noting that the borough’s application for a loan could provide up to $1 million in grant money as principal forgiveness if both phases are completed. The council also faced criticism for not conducting an expert-based study to address the failures of Well 10, with suggestions that this oversight could lead to repeating past mistakes.

The choice of location for Well 11 was another contentious issue. Residents questioned the proximity of the proposed well to existing ones, fearing drawdown issues that could affect water quality. An alternative site, Park Central, was suggested, citing its distance from existing wells as a better option. The decision to use the Desert Palm property for the well also drew criticism, with residents arguing that the land’s value warranted a more comprehensive benefit-cost analysis.

In addition to the well discussions, public comments touched on other infrastructure concerns. Noise levels from a proposed generator near residential areas were addressed, with assurances that it would be housed in a sound-attenuating enclosure. A resident inquired about the timeline for demolishing a disused hotel, expressing a desire for expedited action on this eyesore.

The meeting also highlighted ongoing legal matters related to the well projects, with some residents questioning the borough’s timing and planning decisions. Concerns over water quality from Well 10, which has been marred by turbidity and odor issues, were echoed throughout the discussion. Despite the challenges, the borough’s other wells were reported to produce high-quality water, though the council was urged to ensure any new well did not face the same issues as Well 10.

As the meeting continued, a broader conversation emerged about the borough’s water resources and infrastructure management. The council discussed the potential integration of filtration systems into new wells and the possibility of collaboration with neighboring municipalities that already have such systems. Residents voiced concerns about the costs of these solutions and the importance of clear communication and accountability from the council.