Ordinances To Strip Toms River Council Powers Rejected

Note: This article has been updated with additional comment from Council President Justin Lamb and Mayor Daniel Rodrick, as well as information from copies of the rejected ordinances, which were provided to Patch on Thursday.

TOMS RIVER, NJ ? A series of ordinances that would have stripped authority from the Toms River Township Council was rejected by the council on Wednesday night.

The ordinances, which were on the agenda for first readings, were turned down, with Council President Justin Lamb joining Councilmen Tom Nivison, Jim Quinlisk, and David Ciccozzi in rejecting them. Councilman William Byrne and Councilwoman Lynn O'Toole voted in favor of introducing them, while Council Vice President Craig Coleman voted yes on some and abstained on others.

Also rejected were a pair of ordinances that would have dissolved the Toms River Municipal Utilities Authority and replaced it with a township-run wastewater collection services utility.

Lamb, in voting against the ordinances, repeatedly cited the fact that his term on the council ends in seven weeks, at the end of December, as a key reason for his no vote.

Mayor Daniel Rodrick, who had counted on Lamb in past council meetings to push through ordinances and items that he wanted to get done, said little as the ordinances were rejected.

But he blasted Lamb as the council voted on the final item on the consent agenda, a resolution added on Wednesday that would have sought permission from the Local Finance Board to dissolve the MUA. Rodrick accused Lamb of doing the bidding of George Gilmore, the Ocean County Republican Party chairman.

"You could have saved taxpayers $2.5 million a year," Rodrick said, referring in part to money paid to "politically connected law firms and engineering firms" that provide professional services to the MUA.

"It?s pretty clear this council is bought and owned by the same political interests," he said, before he and business administrator Jon Salonis got up and left the meeting before public comment. O'Toole also left before public comment.

While the main part of the council meeting was recorded, the video was shut off after Rodrick and Salonis left.

The ordinances that were rejected were:

• One to repeal Section 16 under Chapter 5 of the township's ordinances, regarding the council's role of advice and consent on the mayor's appointments. The title on the council agenda published Monday night simply stated the entire section would be repealed. An updated agenda made available at the council meeting specified that it would have repealed three portions of the section that set time limits on the mayor's nomination of appointments and what happens if the council rejects those nominations.

Lamb called the council's role of advice and consent "a valuable breakwater in government."

"There should be some tension" between the council and the mayor, he said. "Tension in government is good. It keeps things fair." He added he was "going to root for both sides" when the new council members take their seats in January and urged the council and mayor to work together.se

Rodrick insisted by text message on Thursday morning that the three sections he sought to repeal are illegal and "would require me to continually submit new names, which would be a violation of my right as the Mayor to choose someone."

• One to amend Chapter 5, Section 8A titled Agenda "to establish additional policies and procedures pertaining to council meeting agendas."

"With seven weeks left, I find it odd that I would vote for something that would tinker with our code," Lamb said. He said the current process where the council president can put things on the agenda or a majority of the council ? four members ? can request items "is a positive."

"It would be unfair of me to vote on this," he said.

A copy of the rejected ordinance, which was forwarded to Patch on Thursday, showed it would have allowed resolutions or ordinances to be placed on the agenda if they were requested by three council members.

• One to amend Chapter 80 of the town's ordinances titled Claims Approval, "to revise the policies and procedures related to the approval of claims," regarding bills presented to the township.

In voting no on this, Lamb called it draconian and punitive toward some members of the council.

Under the rejected ordinance, council members would have been barred from rejecting payments for anything but a "non-political, legal basis." If the township was later sued over a nonpayment, the ordinance would have made the council members who voted against the payment to be personally responsible for the financial costs of the legal battle.

Quinlisk, Ciccozzi and Nivison have repeatedly voted to reject payments to Shore News Media, owned by Phil Stilton who briefly served as the township's public information officer in 2024.

While Rodrick was a councilman, he repeatedly voted against the bills to pay attorneys involved when the township council under then-Council President George Wittman censured Rodrick on three occasions over comments and actions, including allegations he leaked information from an executive session. Because of council conflicts requiring other council members to abstain, payment of those bills was delayed for months.

• One to amend Chapter 14 titled Office Of Municipal Clerk. It would have eliminated one deputy municipal clerk's position and would have modified "the appointing authority of subordinate officers and employees."

Lamb said he spoke with former municipal clerk and township historian J. Mark Mutter, who said the clerk's office had always been under the authority of the Township Council and Lamb said he was not willing to change that.

Rodrick insisted the authority to hire employees in the clerk's office other than the clerk and deputy clerk belong to the mayor and business administrator under the Faulkner Act, the state law that defines the various forms of governing municipalities in New Jersey. The act says the intent of the mayor-council form is for the council to have "general legislative powers, and such investigative powers as are germane to the exercise of its legislative powers, but to retain for the mayor full control over the municipal administration and over the administration of municipal services."

"It?s illegal to allow the council to hire employees other than those two employees," Rodrick said.

On the remaining two that would have changed the council's authority ? one to make changes to Chapter 49, Section 4 "to revise the policies and procedures related to the approval of new assistant township attorneys," and one to amend Chapter 147 to establish salary ranges for confidential employees and also amend Chapter 40, Section 5, to change the title of assistant township business administrator to chief of staff ? Lamb said those should be left to the incoming council to discuss and decide.

Rodrick insisted the council's advice-and-consent role does not extend to the hiring of an assistant township attorney.

During the discussion about the MUA ordinances, Lamb acknowledged that the idea of dissolving the MUA ? which he referred to as a patronage pit ? has been considered in the past, including under former Mayor Thomas Kelaher, but never moved forward.

Lamb said he was voting against them because he felt the matter was being rushed through.

Lamb said a lack of information about the potential costs to the township, including the MUA's outstanding bonds and other financial obligations, was a concern. Under state law, the township has to have a plan drawn up that shows how it will take care of the MUA's outstanding debts. The Toms River MUA owed more than $8.5 million in outstanding bonds at the beginning of 2025, according to the MUA's 2025 budget.

"I don't know what the new numbers are on this, and it feels rushed," Lamb said. "For that reason alone, I vote no."

The resolution to seek approval of the Local Finance Board at the state Department of Community Affairs, which sparked Rodrick's blast, was added to the agenda on Wednesday. Lamb did not have a copy of the ordinance containing the resolution and asked Rodrick to explain it.

That's when Rodrick blasted him, accusing Lamb of protecting the political appointees and turning his back on taxpayers.

"At the last minute on your way out you betrayed your promise to the people," Rodrick said. "You said you're against these authorities but you're not."

Lamb tried to respond but Rodrick kept shouting over him until Lamb cut him off.

"You're cutting me off because George told you to cut me off, didn't he," Rodrick said.

After the meeting, Rodrick reiterated by email his criticisms of Lamb.

"Nothing that is on the agenda makes it onto the agenda without authorization of the council president," Rodrick said, in spite of the evening's agenda confusion with Lamb over the Local Finance Board resolution.

"Council president Lamb?s sudden reversal is a clear indication of a promise made by Convict Chairman George Gilmore, whose firm is the engineer for the municipal utilities authority," Rodrick said. "Lamb?s wife was promised a job at the county and she was also promised to be the next Ocean County Clerk when Jack Kelly steps aside."

"I wonder what George promised Justin?" he said.

Lamb, in an emailed statement Thursday, said he "allowed these Ordinances to fail publicly to show the taxpayers that real checks and balances have always been in place set by Township Code and must remain for posterity?s sake."

"As Council President, I?ve stopped several attempts at power grabs in the past that the public was not able to see," Lamb said.

"I?m never surprised Rodrick resorts to personal attacks, especially against my good-natured, hard-working wife, it?s just an unusual personality flaw, a poor example set by an alleged educator from Hudson County," he said. "My only hope is that he works on his own hubris in the coming months, since it clearly appeared to take a turn for the worse last night."

Rodrick on Wednesday night reiterated his statement that the rejection of the Toms River MUA dissolution protected "commissioners who receive a $40,000 health insurance policy for going to one 10-minute meeting a month."

According to the 2025 MUA budget, only commissioners Charles Valvano and Sam Ellenbogen (who was just elected to the Ocean County Board of Commissioners) receive compensation that exceeds $40,000. The column includes both health and pension benefits, but it is unclear how the total is split up.

MUA commissioner Phil Brilliant, a vocal critic of Rodrick and a favorite target of the mayor, receives $17,300 in additional compensation including health coverage, according to the 2025 MUA budget. (See the commissioners' compensation below.)

"The Township already manages the stormwater sewers," Rodrick said. "Residents shouldn?t have to pay outrageous sewer bills to an authority that doesn?t need to exist. Dissolving the MUA would?ve saved taxpayers millions of dollars. It was a sad day for residents."

There is one council meeting left for the year, set for 6 p.m. on Wednesday, Dec. 10.