Hopewell Borough Council introduced a revised ordinance Monday night that would place an updated ballot question before voters this fall regarding the proposed sale of the municipal water system to New Jersey-American Water.
The action, taken during a special June 23 virtual meeting, replaces a previously introduced version of Ordinance 902. The new version shortens the ballot language and clarifies the scope of required water system remediation, following a review by the Mercer County Clerk’s Office.
“This is the kind of replacement ordinance that will have the revised ballot question and explanation,” said Mayor Ryan Kennedy. “It’s up on the website and this is the text that will be on the ballot in November.”
In addition to shortening the language, the updated interpretive statement clarifies that arsenic remediation is only needed on Well 6, not on both Wells 4 and 6 as the previous version had implied. Borough officials said the revision reflects a more accurate understanding of site-specific conditions.
The potential ballot question asks:
“Shall the Water System of the Borough of Hopewell in Mercer County, New Jersey, be sold to New Jersey-American Water Company, Inc., a New Jersey Board of Public Utilities-regulated water utility, for the sum of $6,400,000?”
If approved, the sale would transfer ownership and operation of the system to New Jersey-American Water, which has committed to investing at least $7 million in improvements, including PFAS remediation and eventual decommissioning of Well 4. The borough estimates the average residential customer could see a 36% reduction in quarterly water costs.
Should voters reject the measure, the borough would retain ownership and remain responsible for all maintenance and capital upgrades, estimated at $7–12 million over the next decade. Rates would remain under local control but likely rise to support those investments.
The public hearing and second reading of the revised ordinance will take place at the council’s next regular meeting, scheduled for July 10.
During the public comment period, one resident offered support for the proposed sale but expressed concern that the interpretive statement remains as clear and neutral as possible, noting the potentially polarizing term “privatization.”
Kennedy responded that while individual council members may hold strong views, the ordinance was crafted with guidance from legal counsel and the county clerk to ensure neutrality and compliance with state requirements.
“A lot of time went into trying to get all the things that were pertinent for a voter to understand and have it be a reasonable length, which was tricky,” he said.
The meeting concluded with unanimous approval of the revised ordinance.
The final potential ballot language and explanation are available on the borough website.
