By JACQUELINE DURETT
Correspondent
SAYREVILLE — At the last meeting before the election, Republicans and Democrats in Sayreville sparred over whether the water in the borough needed more analysis and possible additional filtration.
Republican Councilman Art Rittenhouse addressed the issue at the top of the Oct. 24 meeting, saying during the council election season, the Democrats had sent mailers and posted on social media with information about water concerns—information Rittenhouse thought was misleading.
Concerns around chromium-6 heightened throughout the area earlier this fall when nonprofit Environmental Working Group released findings about the presence of the toxic substance in many area municipalities, including Sayreville.
Rittenhouse said he thought the issue had been resolved nearly two months ago when the Director of Water and Sewer, Robert Smith, presented information to the council about the safety of the water.
Rittenhouse had the audio from Smith’s presentation replayed at the Oct. 24 meeting. In his comments, Smith said that water is evaluated for total chromium (comprised of both chromium-3 and chromium-6), and the borough is well under both the federal and state levels for acceptability.
Smith said Sayreville’s standard is 800 times less than the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) standard, and 80 times less than the N.J. Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) one.
Smith stressed the water department takes water safety very seriously.
“Sayreville’s drinking water meets all EPA and NJ DEP standard requirements and is safe to drink,” he said.
Rittenhouse said at the Oct. 24 meeting that political fliers, however, have convinced residents that there is cause for concern.
However, Democratic Councilwomen Mary Novak and Victoria Kilpatrick said they still had concerns.
Novak pointed out that the borough’s most recent water report to residents is based on data from two years ago. Kilpatrick said the issue was worth a new discussion about filtering capabilities, adding that her research led her to believe that chromium-6 is dangerous no matter how small the amount.
Kilpatrick said the issue illustrated the differences between the parties, as she said she and her colleagues are continually looking for ways to make the town safer, instead of accepting a situation for what it currently is. She said she took issue that Smith was only brought in to allay fears, not to discuss how to make the water better.
“Anytime you have a cancer-causing agent in water, I don’t think one statement is enough,” she said.
Novak pointed out that lead paint used to be considered safe, but that was later disproven.
“In two more years we might find out that any chromium can hurt an unborn child, so why not be proactive now?” she said.
Rittenhouse said he believed the borough was being proactive with ongoing monitoring but said he would have Smith look into a filter.
The debate at one point was interrupted by some brief shouting from the audience. One person called for the council to move on, citing it as a political issue. Kilpatrick said she was disheartened that a resident would think drinking water was not an issue worth a full discussion.
“I really think we should do everything we can to get it out of the water,” Novak said.
O’Brien had the last words at the meeting on the issue.
“I think it’s inherently wrong to scare the daylights out of the residents for political purposes,” he said. His comment was met with applause.