Exposing the Corruption in Toms River Township

Exposing the Corruption in Toms River Township All content shared here is based strictly on verified facts.

This page is dedicated to uncovering and publicly sharing instances of corruption that have taken place in Toms River—incidents that have been hidden from the public for far too long.

09/12/2026

PHIL BRILLIANT YOU CAN’T SCREAM “POLITICS!” WHILE STANDING IN THE MIDDLE OF IT.

Brilliant repeatedly attacks Mayor Rodrick and cries “politics!”

So let’s look at the $73,000 Council Liaison appointment he’s now fighting over.

Let me be crystal clear: I do not know Noriko Kowalewski, and this is NOT an attack on her, her résumé or her political career.

In fact, as a fellow Republican, I suspect Ms. Kowalewski and I probably share many of the same views and values. Looking at her political résumé, I find it much harder to say the same about Phil Brilliant.

That’s exactly why this isn’t about her. It’s about him and the hypocrisy.

▪️ Kowalewski worked on Congressman Tom MacArthur’s campaign and later in his congressional office.

▪️ She served as Campaign Chair of the Ocean County Republican Organization.

▪️ She managed campaigns for Ocean County Commissioners Gary Quinn and Bobbi Jo Crea.

▪️ She’s a longtime Republican political organizer and county committee member.

▪️ Her political circles have overlapped with the Ocean County/Toms River Republican establishment, including former Mayor Mo Hill.

▪️ The Council didn’t simply authorize a position — it passed a resolution appointing Kowalewski by name at $73,000 a year.

▪️ And now Phil Brilliant’s lawsuit has become the battleground for getting that appointment enforced.

SO HERE’S MY CHALLENGE TO PHIL BRILLIANT:

Who put her name forward? Was the job publicly advertised? Who else was interviewed? And why was she selected?

You demand transparency from everyone else.

Your turn, Phil…Put the process on the table.

09/02/2026

FOLLOW THE MONEY…FOLLOW THE TIMELINE…

Remember the Silverton EMS story I wrote about?

There’s a new development and it makes that old timeline worth looking at again.

Here’s what people need to remember:

• 2018: Mayor Tom Kelaher moves to stop Township dispatching of Silverton EMS after a financial dispute.

• 2019: Mo Hill and Kevin Geoghegan run together. A new shared-services agreement with Silverton is put in place.

• MID-2021: According to the lawsuit Toms River would later file in 2024, Silverton allegedly began using its own billing service and keeping 100% of the load fees instead of giving the Township its 20% share.

Mo Hill was Mayor…Kevin Geoghegan was Council President…

• 2024: The Rodrick administration stops dispatching Silverton, refers the matter to the Ocean County Prosecutor’s Office and the Township files suit.

And let’s not forget that referral.

Toms River referred these potentially criminal allegations to Ocean County Prosecutor Bradley Billhimer in 2024.

Two years later where are we?

No publicly announced criminal charges. No public explanation of what happened with the referral. Billhimer’s office would not even confirm or deny whether an investigation was taking place.

Why?

That’s another question taxpayers deserve answered.

• NOW- SEPTEMBER 2026: Mo Hill has retained his own attorney in connection with the litigation involving his former running mate, Kevin Geoghegan.

The allegations in this lawsuit still have to be proven in court. But the timeline is the timeline.

FOLLOW THE MONEY…FOLLOW THE TIMELINE…

Friends, we voted this political establishment out.

Don’t let Phil Brilliant or anyone else rewrite the history and make you forget what was happening before 2024.

Call it whatever you want. I call it the GOOD OL’ BOYS CLUB.

And I don’t think we’ve seen the last of it.

HERE’S MY CHALLENGE:

Don’t take my word for it. Don’t take Brilliant’s word for it. Don’t take Shore News’ word for it.

LOOK AT THE DATES…LOOK AT THE DOCUMENTS…FOLLOW THE MONEY…FOLLOW THE TIMELINE…

Then decide for yourself…

08/22/2026

70 ACRES GONE? REZONED? GIVEN AWAY?

That’s what residents are being told.

A graphic circulating around Toms River claims Mayor Daniel Rodrick “rezoned 70 acres on Route 9,” has a preservation record of “-70 acres,” and is giving township land to a developer for $1, along with a PILOT and $556,000.

Those are serious claims.

NOW LET’S LOOK AT WHAT ACTUALLY HAPPENED:

There WAS an earlier proposal involving roughly 70-plus acres along Route 9.

IT FAILED.

The ordinance that ultimately passed applies to Block 171, Lots 23 and 42 approximately 9 acres of township-owned property.

Not 70. Approximately 9.

So how did a 70-plus-acre ordinance that never passed suddenly become “70 acres rezoned” and “-70 acres and counting”?

OPEN SPACE: The Route 9 property is township-owned and was acquired with public money. But these parcels were not legally preserved open space on Toms River’s Recreation and Open Space Inventory (ROSI). You can oppose developing the land without changing its legal status.

PILOT: Yes, the Beacon option includes a proposed 40-year PILOT. Question it- I certainly do. But PILOT means Payment In Lieu Of Taxes. Saying simply “no taxes” leaves out the fact that payments are made under a different structure.

$556,000: Yes, that number is real. It comes from the Affordable Housing Trust Fund, money designated for affordable-housing purposes. Whether this is the best use of it is absolutely fair to debate.

THE $1 GIVEAWAY: This is where I have a problem.

The records show approximately 9 acres on Route 9, Beacon Estates, the proposed 125 affordable units, the 40-year PILOT and the $556,000 in Affordable Housing Trust Fund money.

What I cannot find is a public document establishing that this property is being sold to a developer for $1.

Maybe it exists.

If it does…show us.

Show us the adopted ordinance where Rodrick rezoned 70 acres.

Show us where these parcels were legally preserved open space and then removed from preservation.

Show us the agreement establishing the $1 sale price.

And show us the actual PILOT terms so taxpayers can decide for themselves whether it’s a good deal or a bad one.

If the documents prove these claims, POST THEM.

Not another graphic.
Not another slogan.

The documents…

Because a graphic isn’t evidence, and repeating something over and over doesn’t turn it into fact.

The challenge is simple: bring the receipts.

08/05/2026

REFUSE TO WORK WITH THE MAYOR THEN BLAME THE MAYOR FOR NOT WORKING WITH THEM. THAT IS THE COUNCIL MAJORITY’S PLAYBOOK.

Phil Brilliant wants us to believe Mayor Rodrick caused this affordable housing mess.

What Phil Brilliant leaves out is that David Ciccozzi, Robert Bianchini, Tom Nivison, and Clinton Bradley have publicly refused to speak with the Mayor, return his calls, or answer his emails.

They refuse to work with him…then blame him for not working with them.

That is textbook political gaslighting, pushed by Phil Brilliant, the Hill-Gilmore gang, and the same RINOs who will blame Mayor Rodrick for absolutely everything.

Then there is Robert Bianchini.

Robert Bianchini keeps shouting that Jamestowne apartments rent for $1,500 to $2,000 a month but is he talking about market-rate rents or affordable-housing rents?

Those are two completely different things.

If Robert Bianchini has the facts, show us the numbers. If he does not, stop pounding your chest, raising your voice, and presenting half the story as truth.

Let me be perfectly clear:

We support placing the required affordable-housing units at Jamestowne. We do NOT support turning downtown Toms River into a massive high-density redevelopment filled with apartments, businesses, restaurants, event venues, traffic, and congestion.

Downtown already struggles with parking, infrastructure, quality-of-life concerns, and a serious homelessness problem. Fix what is already broken before creating more problems.

Phil Brilliant loves putting Mayor Rodrick, his administration, and anyone who supports him under a microscope.

But when it is time to scrutinize David Ciccozzi, Robert Bianchini, Tom Nivison, and Clinton Bradley?

Crickets…

Call the council majority…Email them…Tell them this is not what residents want.

They love reminding everyone that Mayor Rodrick works for the people.

SO DO THEY!

We do not work for them.

THEY WORK FOR US!

Mayor Rodrick is the one standing between Toms River and Phil Brilliant, the Hill-Gilmore gang, and the RINOs’ vision for our town.

* Refuse to work
* Create chaos
* Blame the Mayor

They can spin it. They can shout it. They can try to silence us.

We will not be silenced. We will keep asking questions. We will keep exposing what we believe residents deserve to know.

And remember this: sooner or later, accountability catches up with everyone. When that day comes, the residents of Toms River will remember who stood up for our town and who didn’t.

Email the council majority. Ask them one simple question: When will you put politics aside and work with the Mayor for the people of Toms River?

Ocean County News Squad
Shore News Network

08/03/2026

DAVID CICCOZZI SHOULD NOT EXPECT BLIND TRUST FROM THE RESIDENTS OF TOMS RIVER.

David Ciccozzi owns property in downtown Toms River while participating in votes involving major downtown redevelopment decisions.

Does that automatically prove an ethics violation? No…

But it does raise legitimate questions that deserve full disclosure.

New Jersey ethics law prohibits a local official from acting on a matter when a direct or indirect financial involvement could reasonably impair that official’s independence of judgment.

Residents deserve clear answers:

What downtown properties does David Ciccozzi own?

How close are those properties to the proposed tower projects?

Could those projects increase the value or commercial potential of his properties?

Did he seek formal ethics guidance before participating in those votes?

If he did, will he release it?

If he did not, why?

Ciccozzi demands accountability and transparency from the Mayor, his administration and anyone who supports them but he does not appear to hold himself or the council majority to that same standard.

Now it is his turn to answer the questions.

In my opinion, Ciccozzi has a pattern of presenting himself as the victim whenever he is challenged, while the direct questions residents are asking remain unanswered.

He is the Council President…Residents have every right to ask him to demonstrate that his participation in these votes was not influenced by a personal financial interest.

Imagine if the tables were turned and Mayor Rodrick owned downtown property while supporting high-rise development.

In my opinion, Ciccozzi and his supporters would lose their minds demanding answers, disclosures and complete transparency.

The same standard must apply to everyone.

Until Ciccozzi answers these questions publicly, residents have every right to question whether he should have participated in these particular redevelopment votes.

The challenge is simple: answer every question, identify every property and release any ethics guidance. No excuses…No deflection…Full transparency…

Based on Ciccozzi’s track record, I doubt residents will hear any real answers. We will probably hear plenty of backlash from his camp but when it comes to answering the actual questions?

Crickets.

07/26/2026

IF YOU CAN’T CONTROL THE MEETING, YOU SHOULDN’T BE THE COUNCIL PRESIDENT.

The debate over livestreaming public comment isn’t really about cameras.

It’s about leadership.

Public comment should absolutely be live-streamed but only when the Council President is capable of maintaining order and ensuring every resident has the opportunity to speak without being threatened, bullied or shouted down.

Unfortunately, that is not what we’ve seen in Toms River.

Instead of discussing Township business, public comment has too often become a platform for personal attacks against Mayor Rodrick, his administration and residents who support him.

I’ve watched people stand at that podium and use their time to insult rather than inform.

I’ve watched residents who support the Mayor become targets simply because they hold a different opinion.

I’ve watched the crowd cheer on the hostility.

And I’ve watched Council President David Ciccozzi do little to stop it.

The Council President is responsible for running the meeting. He wanted that position. He accepted the responsibility that comes with it.

Leadership isn’t about holding a gavel.

Leadership is about making decisions, enforcing the rules, treating everyone fairly and keeping the focus on the people of Toms River not political theater.

At the last Council meeting, Mr. Ciccozzi said on the record:

“I don’t know if I can keep doing this.”

If that’s truly how he feels, then perhaps it’s time to ask whether he should continue serving as Council President.

Toms River deserves a Council President who is confident enough to lead, strong enough to maintain order and willing to put the Township ahead of politics.

Instead, what we’ve seen is meeting after meeting of disorder, personal attacks and a lack of leadership.

At some point, it stops being political disagreement and starts looking like RDS—Rodrick Derangement Syndrome. Some people have become so consumed by their hatred of Mayor Rodrick that they can’t discuss a single Township issue without making it about him. Simply saying you support the Mayor is enough to trigger insults, accusations and hostility. That isn’t healthy debate, and it certainly isn’t moving Toms River forward.

For months, I’ve asked one simple question:

What has David Ciccozzi accomplished during his years on the Township Council?

Not once have I received a direct answer.

Instead, the responses are almost always the same:

“Rodrick is a moron.”

“Rodrick is horrible.”

“Rodrick this…”

“Rodrick that…”

That’s not an answer.

That’s exactly what’s wrong with politics in Toms River.

They don’t defend their record because they can’t.

I’ve repeatedly asked for one example of something this Council majority has accomplished to move Toms River forward, and no one has answered that question. Instead, they change the subject and attack Mayor Rodrick.

Their focus appears to be returning Toms River to the same political system that existed under the Hill administration a system where political insiders held influence through jobs, appointments and long-standing political relationships.

I don’t believe they’re focused on moving Toms River forward.

I believe they’re focused on getting Toms River back.

That is what this fight is really about.

I’m done asking the question.

The residents have watched the meetings.

They’ve seen the behavior.

They can decide for themselves.

If we want a different future for Toms River, we can’t sit back and hope someone else fixes it. We have to stand together, stay engaged and vote.

Because if we don’t, we’ll keep getting exactly what we’ve been getting.

Toms River deserves leaders who solve problems, maintain order and put residents first not leaders who spend their time attacking one man while failing to lead the Township they were elected to serve.

07/24/2026

PHIL BRILLIANT CALLED HIS POST “FACTS VS. EXCUSES”WHILE CONVENIENTLY LEAVING OUT THE FACTS.AGAIN…

Patch did not report that Toms River Internal Affairs was corrupt, compromised or operating improperly.

No audit was identified. No failed investigation was revealed. No misconduct was established. The Prosecutor offered a broad statement about protecting “independence and integrity” without publicly identifying the specific problem that supposedly required this takeover.

Yet Phil Brilliant posted a manipulated crying image and declared that “accountability” had arrived.

Accountability for what, Phil Brilliant? What wrongdoing was actually established?

Here is what Phil Brilliant left out:

The takeover occurred days after Mayor Rodrick announced an investigation into the removal of Chief Guy Maire’s nameplate and the false story that the chief was gone.

Patch also reported that the Toms River Police Department had recently been reaccredited for meeting or surpassing professional operating standards. And notifying the Attorney General is not the same as the Attorney General independently investigating or approving the takeover.

Phil Brilliant’s argument is simple: Something must have been wrong because the Prosecutor took over and the takeover must be justified because something was wrong.

That is not evidence. That is propaganda.

Now let’s discuss the facts Phil Brilliant never places at the top of his own posts.

Phil Brilliant is a politically appointed MUA commissioner. According to the 2025 MUA budget, he was listed as receiving $17,300 in additional compensation, including health coverage. MUA commissioners also receive annual stipends of $2,000, and Phil Brilliant himself acknowledged that his health benefits cost approximately $14,000 every year.

Mayor Rodrick has pushed to dissolve the MUA and eliminate taxpayer-funded healthcare for its commissioners. That means Phil Brilliant is not some neutral observer he receives a financial benefit directly threatened by the mayor’s policies.

Phil Brilliant is also a volunteer trustee of the Ocean Wind Pro-NJ Trust. I found no evidence the trust pays him personally. Unlike Phil Brilliant, we do not need to invent accusations. The documented truth is damaging enough.

Phil Brilliant, here is the challenge:

Post the entire Patch article.

Identify the specific misconduct the Prosecutor publicly identified. Explain why you omitted the timing of the takeover and the department’s recent reaccreditation. Then publicly explain the $17,300 in additional compensation, including health coverage, listed for you in the 2025 MUA budget and disclose whether you receive any separate stipend or other benefits as an MUA commissioner.

Toms River- was Phil Brilliant’s post FACTS or PROPAGANDA?

Comment one word below.

And Phil Brilliant answer the questions…Don’t deflect…And don’t hide behind another manipulated picture.

07/21/2026

THE OLD GUARD COULD NOT CONTROL DAN RODRICK SO THEY TRIED TO SILENCE HIM…NOW THEY WANT TOMS RIVER BACK.

Residents need to remember why Dan Rodrick was elected mayor.

Rodrick once stood alone on the dais while the council tried to silence him and even attempted to keep an elected councilman out of the clerk’s office.

In 2018, he was served with a lawsuit during a public council meeting. Then Maria Maruca, Kevin Geoghegan and Terrance Turnbach pushed for state authorities to investigate and take legal action against him.

Let those names sink in: Maruca. Geoghegan. Turnbach.

They could not control Rodrick, so they tried to intimidate, humiliate and politically destroy him.

Residents eventually voted them out.

Now we are watching the same playbook again.

Different council majority. Same bullying. Same political machine.

Ciccozzi, Nivison, Bianchini and Bradley create chaos, obstruct the mayor and then blame Rodrick for the dysfunction they helped create.

Rodrick: Promises made. Promises kept.

The council majority: Obstruct Rodrick…Protect the old guard…Regain power…

And according to a source inside the county Republican circle, Justin Lamb and Matt Lotano are being discussed for possible commissioner appointments. Pete Van Dyke’s name is reportedly being floated for mayor, while Mitch Little may also be showing interest.

I have not independently confirmed that any decisions have been made. But residents should pay close attention to the names being discussed and to who is positioning them.

The old Republican establishment and its RINO allies are already planning their return.

So here is my challenge to Ciccozzi, Nivison, Bianchini and Bradley:

Name one major promise you made and kept.

Name the taxes you lowered.

Name the services you improved.

Tell residents what your vision is beyond attacking Dan Rodrick.

Because attacking Rodrick is not an accomplishment.

Blocking Rodrick is not leadership.

Creating chaos is not governing.

The old guard needs to hear this clearly: Residents voted you out once. We will fight to make sure you never regain control of Toms River.

07/18/2026

PHIL BRILLIANT CALLED OUT THIS PAGE…GOOD…NOW LET’S TELL THE WHOLE TRUTH.

Yes, this page previously wrote about the Clifton Avenue property.

Yes, this page reported that environmental testing found no asbestos contamination at the proposed park site.

And yes, those posts were based on the environmental reports and information available at the time.

I am not going to pretend I never wrote about it simply because Phil Brilliant is now waving around a different government record and taking another Facebook victory lap.

But here is what Phil Brilliant is not explaining to his followers:

Environmental testing of the property and alleged workplace-safety violations involving DPW employees are not automatically the same issue.

The new record involves serious allegations concerning whether township employees were properly trained and protected while handling asbestos-related material.

That deserves to be taken seriously.

What it does not deserve is Phil Brilliant’s usual exaggeration, political spin and selective storytelling.

The case is still OPEN.

The citations are CONTESTED.

The $338,000 is a PROPOSED penalty.

There has been no final ruling, yet Phil Brilliant is already calling them “final penalties” and declaring that taxpayers will be paying them.

That is not reporting the facts.

That is Phil racing ahead of an unfinished case because the truth by itself is apparently not dramatic enough for his page.

He also named this page and placed statements in quotation marks as though he were quoting us directly.

So here is my challenge to you, Phil Brilliant:

Post the exact screenshots.

Show the complete posts, the dates and the full context.

Then show everyone where this page ever said worker-safety rules did not matter, that employees should not have been protected or that any legitimate OSHA finding should be ignored.

You will not find it.

This page reported what the environmental testing said at the time. The newly released workplace-safety allegations raise a separate and serious question.

That is the honest explanation.

Phil Brilliant, knock it off.

Report the truth, stick to the facts, explain the full record, and stop twisting unfinished cases into dramatic political headlines.

The exaggerations, the spin and the constant nonsense are getting old. We are all sick of it.

You are not the investigator, the judge or the final authority on everything happening in Toms River.

You called out this page.

Now post the full receipts not selected words, not your interpretation and not another one of your misleading summaries.

Tell the whole truth for once.

Then find a hobby.

07/11/2026

Five years. Countless promises. Where are the results, David Ciccozzi?

David Ciccozzi is currently serving his fifth year as Ward 4 Councilman and is the current Council President.

When he first ran for office, he asked the residents of Ward 4 to trust him. He made promises. He asked to be judged by his leadership and by the results he would deliver.

So far, what I have witnessed is constant political conflict, heated exchanges at council meetings, verbal attacks, and repeated criticism directed at Mayor Rodrick and many of the Mayor’s supporters. In my opinion, that reflects poorly on the leadership of the Council, and as Council President, that responsibility falls squarely on David Ciccozzi.

Leadership isn’t about raising your voice. It’s about following the law, respecting the process, treating people with respect, and representing the residents who elected you.

Campaign promises should be measured by actions not titles, excuses, or political rhetoric.

Based on David Ciccozzi’s record to date, my grade for his performance as Ward 4 Councilman is an F.

As Council President, my grade is an F-.

The Council President sets the tone for council meetings, maintains order, and leads the governing body. Based on what I have observed, that standard has not been met.

Since taking office, I have yet to see meaningful accomplishments that have improved Ward 4 or fulfilled the promises made to the residents who elected him. Instead, the focus has too often been on political infighting while the issues that matter most to residents continue to take a back seat.

Wednesday night’s council meeting reinforced those concerns.

Council President Ciccozzi acknowledged that the position is taking its toll on him. Public service is demanding, and leadership comes with pressure. But residents deserve a Council President who can lead with confidence, remain composed under pressure, and stay focused on serving the people of Toms River.

Leadership isn’t about holding a title.

It’s about producing results.

Now I’d like to hear from the residents.

How would you grade David Ciccozzi’s performance as Ward 4 Councilman?

What grade would you give him and why?

Can you point to specific accomplishments he has delivered for Ward 4 or for Toms River during his time in office?

How has he improved the services or quality of life he promised when he ran for office?

If you care about the future of Toms River, please Like, Follow, and Share this post so more residents can join the conversation.

Five years. Countless promises. Where are the results?

Address

Toms River, NJ
08753

Website

Alerts

Be the first to know and let us send you an email when Exposing the Corruption in Toms River Township posts news and promotions. Your email address will not be used for any other purpose, and you can unsubscribe at any time.

Shortcuts

Share

Category