Bombshells at Planning Board Meeting?
- Kin Gee
- Jan 16
- 3 min read
At the continuation of the hearing for the redevelopment of the former Vonage property, in front of a packed room of residents, T&M Associates, the Township Engineer, appeared to have admitted that it didn’t perform its duty.
The attorney representing Kristin Celauro, “Objector” to the old Vonage redevelopment application, presented Daniel Nachman, a hydrogeologist, as an expert witness.
In response to the question from the Planning Board’s Chairman Scott Silberman that the New Jersey DEP has better qualifications than the Planning Board to determine proper wastewater management, Nachman stated that, “You have the authority enforce your own wastewater management plan,” and that the Planning Board can impose conditions on the developer to discharge wastewater in compliance with Holmdel’s plan. He went on to say, “You don’t have to accept this grandfathered system.”
In response, Silberman said he will defer to the professionals, turned to Craig Hermann, who is with PS&S and serves as the Planning Board Engineer, and asked whether that is something the Planning Board could do.
The Planning Board Engineer said he knows there is a wastewater management plan in effect and he, “Would think you could condition that it meets that requirement.” He then turned to the Township Engineer from T&M Associates and asked whether he had anything to add to that.
Here’s the exchange that followed:
Planning Board Engineer (Don Whitehead, PS&S): “They should meet the criteria of the wastewater management plan for the town here.”
Silberman: “And what is the criteria, because you’re our professionals, right?”
Planning Board Engineer (Craig Hermann, PS&S): “I haven’t reviewed it because T&M was reviewing the wastewater treatment facility.”
Township Engineer (T&M): We have not reviewed that at this time. I don't believe a formal submission has been made.”
Later in the meeting, Planning Board member Wes Fagan asked whether it is appropriate for this client to supply actual water samples from a similar plant to witness and see the smell and the clarity of the water.
Barry Sutherland, a professional engineer expert witness for the Objector, responded by stating:
“I've never seen a similar plant like this in all my years of working. I've only seen lagoons treat stormwater. I've never been aware of a wastewater lagoon. And I've been doing this since 1978.”
The developer is seeking to grandfather existing water permits for a wastewater management plant that, for six months of the year, will discharge into a C-1 stream that feeds the Swimming River Reservoir, the source of potable water for more than 300,000 Monmouth County residents. For the other six months, the wastewater will be discharged into a lagoon that is located 100 feet away from the C-1 stream. Current environmental standards call for 300 feet.
Later in the meeting, despite admitting to non-review of the wastewater management plant vis-à-vis Holmdel’s Wastewater Management Plan, the Township Engineer, very surprisingly, acted as a Planning Board attorney and stated that this is an application that's fully compliant with a redevelopment plan and the Planning Board is obligated to review what is submitted.
Seemingly forgotten was the earlier testimony by Nachman and the discussion that the Township Committee and, presumably, the Planning Board, by extension, have the authority for wastewater management.
The last Planning Board meeting continues to raise questions about the whole redevelopment process.
1. The redevelopment plan was passed in 2024. The redevelopment agreement was signed in 2025. What did members of the Township Committee in 2024 and 2025 know about the direct discharge of inadequately treated wastewater into a stream that feeds the drinking water for over 300,000 people before passing the redevelopment plan and executing the redevelopment agreement?
2. Was there a dereliction of duty or neglect by professionals - Township Engineer, Township Planner or Township Attorney - in advising the Township Committee regarding the redevelopment plan and redevelopment agreement?
3. Why did it take a private Holmdel resident (Kristin Celauro), spending thousands of dollars to hire an attorney and experts, to expose this fundamental flaw that could contaminate the drinking water for over 300,000 residents in the redevelopment plan and agreement?
Legal and consultant fees currently stand at approximately $30,000 to make the case and protect residents from the potential contamination of our drinking water. Celauro has set up a GoFundMe to help cover these costs and needs donations. Please support this very important cause and donate what you can.
How did we get here?
Will Holmdel be the next Flint, Michigan?
Will the Township Committee take any corrective action?
Stay tuned.
###
Comments