06/08/2026
THIS is a long but simple and necessary read for anyone that even remotely cares about public safety and security in Toms River. Support the work author, Founder of NJ Law Politics & Government (formerly NJ Law Politics and Government), with a simple like share and comment …
"Fools Go It Alone": The Rodrick Administration's War on Toms River's Public Safety
By Paul C. Williams
NJ Law Politics Government | June 7, 2026
On a cold February night in 2024, a woman's voice cut through the chaos of a Toms River council meeting. "You sit on a throne of lies!" she shouted at the dais.
The gavel banged. The crowd roared. And the mayor — Daniel Rodrick, just weeks into his first term — did not flinch.
That meeting was only the beginning. Over the next two years, the Rodrick administration launched an extraordinary legal and political campaign against the very municipal departments responsible for the safety and security of Toms River's approximately 100,000 residents. The Police Department. Code Enforcement. The Office of the Construction Official. Even a first aid squad.
By mid-2026, the tally was staggering: five lawsuits, three fired or forced out public officials, a police force at a 21 year low, a minimum staffing ordinance passed by the Council and vetoed by the Mayor, and a roiling dispute with the Ocean County Prosecutor's Office that landed in Mercer County Superior Court.
The story begins not in a courtroom, but with two resignations — and a bitter warning.
Prologue: "Fools Go It Alone"
On February 2, 2024, just one month after Mayor Daniel Rodrick and his council slate were sworn into office, the Asbury Park Press broke a startling story: the Township's new Business Administrator, Scott Tirella, and his assistant, Loring Dunton, had both resigned.
Tirella, a former Lacey police lieutenant hired at a $165,000 salary, was replaced as acting business administrator by Jon Salonis, a long time Rodrick ally (Asbury Park Press, Feb. 2, 2024) and whom Rodrick hired as the new Director of Recreation although not appearing to possess the requisite qualifications for either position.
But it was Dunton's parting words that reverberated through Town Hall. In a Facebook post, Dunton — a former Toms River police lieutenant — wrote that during his brief tenure, he had "witnessed a scorched earth campaign unlike anything I have ever seen."
"Thoughtful governance was never a guiding principle nor was a search for what was best for the citizens of Toms River," Dunton wrote. "Great leaders seek the advice of subject matter experts to help understand that which they do not know, so as to make smart and thoughtful decisions for the betterment of all stake holders. Fools go it alone."
Dunton specifically referenced the administration's controversial plan to eliminate two police captain positions to fund eight new EMTs. (Asbury Park Press, Feb. 2, 2024).
Mayor Rodrick dismissed Dunton. "I question his business savvy," Rodrick told the Press. "I wasn't impressed. It is no loss. The township is glad to see him go." (Id.)
The resignations were an early warning — but hardly the last.
I. January 18, 2024 – The First Reading and the "Circus" Meeting
On January 18, 2024, the Township Council held a special meeting to introduce the first reading of an ordinance amending the police department's table of organization. The proposal: eliminate two police captain positions through attrition, reduce the number of patrol officers from 113 to 112, and use the purported $700,000 in savings to hire eight new EMTs. (Asbury Park Press, Feb. 15, 2024).
The agenda also included amendments to §50-3(R) of the Township Code, which established the position of Confidential Media Relations Specialist — the Police Department's Public Information Officer. The first reading of the ordinance would, if ultimately adopted, eliminate that position from the Code.
The meeting was a spectacle from the start. The agenda was revised multiple times on the day of the meeting, with only cryptic references to code sections — no public notice that the Police Department's PIO position was on the chopping block. (Messina Complaint ¶¶ 52-55).
That afternoon before the meeting, Mayor Rodrick called me (Paul C. Williams, a life-long Toms River resident and former political ally of Rodrick’s when Rodrick first campaigned as a Democratic candidate for a Council seat in 2016. Rodrick publicly denies this but I have the receipts and photos and text messages and on and on lol). I also recorded most of the call, as it was extraordinary that Rodrick would call me since we had not spoken with each other in many years -- a hot topic of discussion all by itself). In the call, Rodrick referred to Jillian Messina — the woman who held the PIO position — as a "Dipsh*t Government Person." He falsely claimed she had attended "maybe four" council meetings in six years. (Certification of Paul C. Williams, Exhibit A to Messina Complaint).
In fact, Messina had attended and photographed at least 23 council meetings on behalf of the department. (Messina Complaint ¶ 47).
That evening, Messina attended the meeting and spoke publicly in opposition to the proposed changes and in support of herself. (Id. ¶ 63). She received a standing ovation.
The meeting devolved into chaos, because Rodrick kept interrupting and disrupting the meeting. Council President Craig Coleman banged his gavel repeatedly as residents shouted and applauded. I was one of two residents escorted out of the meeting by police. One woman yelled, "You sit on a throne of lies!" The Asbury Park Press called it a "circus." (Feb. 15, 2024).
II. Jillian Messina – Termination and Lawsuit
Jillian Messina had served as the Confidential Media Relations Specialist and Public Information Officer for the Toms River Police Department since 2019 — a position established by Township Code §50-3(R). (Messina Complaint ¶¶ 1, 11-12, 77). She reported directly to the Chief of Police. (Id. ¶ 1).
According to her lawsuit, she worked tirelessly, often more than 60 hours per week, and helped raise over $600,000 for the police foundation. (Id. ¶¶ 12, 63). She had never been criticized or disciplined for her workplace performance. (Id. ¶ 16).
On January 19, 2024 — the day after the first reading and her public comments — Messina received a letter stating she had been terminated with immediate effect. (Id. ¶¶ 69-70).
The decision to fire Messina as an individual was made independently by the Mayor and his administration. The Council did not vote to terminate Messina personally. The Council voted on an ordinance that would eliminate the position itself. The Complaint alleges her termination was retaliatory — for her comments at the meeting and for her relationship with her father, Joseph Nardini, a Rodrick political adversary. (Id. ¶¶ 22-29, 50, 67-68).
On February 14, 2024, the Township Council held the second reading and adopted Ordinance No. 4792-24, which amended §50-3 and eliminated the positions from the Township Code. (Id. ¶¶ 74-75). The vote was 5 to 2, with Councilmen James Quinlisk and David Ciccozzi voting against.
On March 27, 2024, Township residents successfully repealed Ordinance No. 4792-24 through a referendum petition process. (Id. ¶ 78). The positions were preserved in the Code, but Mayor Rodrick refused to reinstate Messina. (Id. ¶ 79).
On April 10, 2024, Messina filed a Verified Complaint in the Superior Court of New Jersey, Ocean County, against Mayor Daniel Rodrick (individually and in his official capacity) and the Township Council. (Messina Complaint).
Her allegations include:
First Amendment retaliation under the New Jersey Civil Rights Act (N.J.S.A. 10:6-2, et seq.). (Id. ¶¶ 88-92).
Gender discrimination under the NJLAD (N.J.S.A. 10:5-1, et seq.) : She was paid 58,000 annually after five years, while newly hired male Township PIO Phil Stilton received 89,999. (Id. ¶¶ 40-41).
The Complaint attached a Certification from Police Chief Mitchell Little, in which Little stated that Rodrick admitted to Stilton that he fired Messina "to get back at her father (Joseph Nardini) for his previous political actions against him and to hurt her, Nardini, the Police Department, and myself (the Chief)." (Little Certification ¶¶ 3, 7).
The Messina lawsuit remains pending.
III. Chief Mitchell Little – Suspension, Lawsuit, Retirement
Chief Mitchell Little had served the Toms River Police Department for 38 years, the last 10 as Chief. (Little Complaint ¶ 1). Before the Rodrick administration, his record was absolutely unblemished — no prior discipline, no suspensions, no controversies.
That record would not protect him.
On April 16-17, 2024, Chief Little was suspended without pay for two days. The Notice of Discipline, signed by Business Administrator Jonathan Salonis, cited failure to produce requested reports. (Exhibit A to Little Complaint).
But the notice contained a critical flaw: it did not provide a designated hearing date. (Little Complaint ¶ 4).
Under New Jersey law (N.J.S.A. 40A:14-147 and -149), a suspended police officer must be given a hearing within 30 days, or the charges must be dismissed. No hearing was ever scheduled.
On April 30, 2024, Chief Little filed a Verified Complaint in the Superior Court of New Jersey, Ocean County (Docket No. OCN-L-001133-24), against the Township of Toms River. (Little Complaint). He sought dismissal of the charges and return to duty.
By May 2024, the Township had not filed an answer. Little requested a default judgment. (Little Request for Default).
In August 2024, after 39 years of service — with an unblemished record — Chief Little retired. He received three months' severance. (Asbury Park Press, Sept. 27, 2024).
IV. The Staffing Crisis – A 21-Year Low and the Short Tenure of Acting Chief Peter Sundack
Even as the political battles raged, the Toms River Police Department was quietly bleeding officers.
By mid-2025, the department's roster of sworn officers had fallen to approximately 145–151 — a 21-year low. (Patch, July 31, 2025). This is well below the 173 officers recommended by a 2004 state study and below the 162 minimum staffing level that the Township Council would later seek to establish.
In late April 2025, Acting Chief Peter Sundack sent an email to Mayor Rodrick and Business Administrator Jonathan Salonis — obtained by the Patch — expressing concern about "critical vacancies." Sundack wrote:
"This continued attrition, without appropriate action to replace departing personnel, significantly undermines our department's ability to fulfill its mission — to protect and serve the citizens of Toms River with the highest standards of professionalism and efficiency." (Patch, July 31, 2025).
Despite the urgency, retirements continued. From January 2024 through June 2025, 12 officers retired, six of them in 2024. Three more retired after mid-June 2025. (Id.)
Shortly after sending that email to the Mayor and Business Administrator, Acting Chief Peter Sundack took a medical leave of absence and retired.
V. Lowering Hiring Standards – But No Hires
On July 30, 2025, the Township Council — still controlled by Rodrick's loyalists — adopted Ordinance No. 4824-25, amending §50-10 of the Township Code to relax police hiring qualifications. (Ordinance, June 30, 2025; news reports, Patch, July 31, 2025; Jersey Shore Online, Aug. 19, 2025).
The previous requirement: a bachelor's degree, or 64 college credits with two years of police service or two years of full-time active duty military experience.
The new requirement: an associate's degree or 60 college credits, or two years of experience in any branch of the United States Military. (Ordinance No. 4824-25).
The ordinance also changed the interview committee: the police chief, mayor, and business administrator would now conduct interviews, replacing the police department's command staff.
Prior to the vote, Ocean County Prosecutor Bradley D. Billhimer sent a letter to Mayor Rodrick and the Township Council urging rejection of the change, warning it "poses a serious risk to public safety, community trust and the integrity of the profession." (Patch, July 30, 2025). Mayor Rodrick responded by calling Billhimer "a far-left liberal hypocrite." (Id.)
The vote was 4 to 3, with council members Justin Lamb, John Coleman, William Byrne, and Lynn O'Toole voting in favor, and council members Thomas Nivison, Jim Quinlisk, and David Ciccozzi voting against. (Patch, July 31, 2025; Jersey Shore Online, Aug. 19, 2025).
Yet despite lowering the standards, not a single officer has been hired under the new ordinance. As of mid-2026, the department's staffing crisis remains unresolved. The current Council, viewed by Rodrick as political opponents, recently passed an ordinance setting minimum staffing requirements of 162 officers. However, Rodrick vetoed it and has taken no public action to address the staffing crisis since.
VI. Three Chiefs in 26 Months — Of 6 Since 1931 — and a Hiring Paralysis
The Toms River Police Department — established in June 1933 (originally as the Dover Township Police Department) — has been led by only a handful of chiefs over its nearly century-long history:
Walter Irons: Served as the first official Chief of Police from September 1931 to February 1933.
Richard C. Clement: Served as Chief for nearly two decades, from 1965 to 1979.
Michael G. Mastronardy: Served from November 1992 until his retirement on December 31, 2013.
Mitch Little: Served from December 2013 until his retirement in August 2024.
For decades, the department was defined by stability and long tenures at the top.
Then came the Rodrick administration.
Following Chief Little's retirement, a rapid and unprecedented churn began:
Mitch Little retired in August 2024 after his suspension and lawsuit against the Township.
Peter Sundack served as Acting Chief for approximately one year (September 2024 to July 2025), during which he sent the email warning of "critical vacancies." Sundack subsequently took a medical leave and then retired.
Guy Maire was appointed Chief on July 30, 2025 — with an explicit waiver of the one-year captain requirement.
Now, in June 2026, Chief Guy Maire is taking a medical leave of absence. Mayor Rodrick confirmed the leave, stating it would last "a few weeks." Captain Anthony Scali will serve as officer in charge while Maire is out. (Multiple news outlets, June 2026).
However, multiple sources have said that Maire notified several people by email of his leave and was seen cleaning out his desk at the police department. Rodrick insisted Maire has not done so and reiterated that the leave is for a few weeks. But rumors persist that Maire will not be returning.
The pattern is unmistakable: Sundack took a “medical leave” and then retired. Maire is now on “medical leave,” and sources report he was cleaning out his desk.
That makes three chiefs (or acting chiefs) since Rodrick took office in January 2024 — of only six total chiefs since 1931. For a department that had seen such stability for generations, this level of turnover is unprecedented.
But there is an even more urgent problem. Under the Township's own ordinance — the very ordinance the Rodrick administration pushed through — police officer hiring requires the involvement of the Chief of Police. The interview committee established by Ordinance No. 4824-25 consists of "the police chief, mayor, and business administrator." Without a sitting chief, the hiring process cannot lawfully proceed.
If Chief Maire does not return, the department will be effectively paralyzed — unable to hire a single new officer until a new chief is appointed. And given the history of turnover, the Council's inability to override a mayoral veto, and the ongoing litigation with OCPO, no one can say how long that might take.
The Rodrick administration has, through its own actions, potentially disabled the police department's ability to hire anyone at all.
The resolution accompanying Maire's appointment acknowledged the irregularity, essentially stating that the Council waived the §50-2(B) requirement that a chief serve one year as Captain because Maire had "substantially satisfied this condition after exceptionally serving as Captain … for approximately 11 months." (Resolution, July 30, 2025).
Whether Maire follows the Sundack trajectory — medical leave to retirement — remains to be seen. But the instability at the top of the department, combined with the statutory requirement for a chief to participate in hiring, means the staffing crisis may soon become a hiring shutdown.
VII. The Rodrick Administration Sues the Prosecutor's Office — and the Law of Supersession
On May 28, 2026, the Township of Toms River, Mayor Daniel T. Rodrick, and Business Administrator Jonathan Salonis filed a Verified Complaint in the Superior Court of New Jersey, Mercer County, against the Ocean County Prosecutor's Office, Prosecutor Billhimer, First Assistant Prosecutor Michael T. Nolan, Jr., the Office of the Attorney General, the Division of Criminal Justice - Prosecutor's Supervision Bureau, and Attorney General Jennifer Davenport. (Township v. OCPO Complaint).
The lawsuit alleged that OCPO had unlawfully interfered with the Township's rights and duties under N.J.S.A. 40A:14-118 (the "Chief's Bill of Rights") and Township Code §50-14(C) in three specific ways:
page Control: OCPO directed former Chief Little to deny Business Administrator Salonis access to the TRPD page, citing concerns about prosecutorial ethics (R.P.C. 3.😎. (Complaint ¶¶ 24-32).
Police Radio Access: OCPO directed Acting Chief Sundack to deny Salonis a general police dispatch radio, citing officer safety — even though a non Township community leader had been given one. (Complaint ¶¶ 36-43).
Hiring Qualifications: OCPO sent a letter opposing the relaxed hiring standards. (Complaint ¶¶ 44-48).
The Township sought a declaration that the Business Administrator or Mayor shall have full access to the police department's page and dispatch radio, and that OCPO shall refrain from interfering in personnel investigations except in cases of criminal or serious administrative misconduct. (Complaint, Prayer for Relief).
The Law of Supersession: Could OCPO Take Over?
To understand the stakes of this lawsuit, it is necessary to understand the legal framework governing county prosecutor oversight of municipal police departments.
The "Appropriate Authority" – N.J.S.A. 40A:14-118
Under New Jersey law, the governing body of any municipality "may create and establish . . . a police force . . . and provide for the maintenance, regulation and control thereof." The statute requires that the chief of police "shall be directly responsible to the appropriate authority for the efficiency and routine day to day operations thereof." The "appropriate authority" is defined as "the mayor, manager, or such other appropriate executive or administrative officer" designated by ordinance. In Toms River, the Township Code at §50-1(D) designates the Business Administrator as the appropriate authority.
However, this municipal authority is not absolute. The New Jersey Constitution provides that municipal powers exist only insofar as they are "not inconsistent with or prohibited by this Constitution or by law." N.J. Const. art. IV, § 7, ¶ 11. As the Supreme Court has held, this represents an "omnipresent brake on the exercise of municipal authority." Fraternal Ord. of Police, Newark Lodge 12 v. City of Newark, 244 N.J. 75, 93 (2020).
The Prosecutor's Supervisory Authority
The county prosecutor serves as "the chief law enforcement officer in the county" and has "broad supervisory authority over the operations of municipal police departments." Gerofsky v. Passaic Cnty. SPCA, 376 N.J. Super. 405, 417 (App. Div. 2005). Under N.J.S.A. 2A:158-5, a county prosecutor is "vested with the same powers" within his county as the Attorney General is vested with statewide.
The Supersession Power – What It Is and Where It Comes From
"Supersession" is the power of a chief law enforcement officer (either the county prosecutor or the Attorney General) to assume control of a law enforcement agency's operations — including, in some cases, "an entire law enforcement agency." Attorney General Law Enforcement Directive No. 2022-14 (Nov. 15, 2022) at 11.
The scope of this power was the central question in Bulur v. Office of the Attorney General, decided by the New Jersey Supreme Court on July 23, 2025.
What the Court held: The Legislature authorized the Attorney General's specific supersession of the Paterson Police Department through two actions: (1) enactment of Chapter 94, which waived training requirements for the out-of-state Officer-in-Charge appointed to lead the department, and (2) a $10 million appropriation in the state budget for the Attorney General's operation of the department. (Bulur slip op. at 22-26).
What the Court declined to hold: The Court expressly declined to decide whether the Attorney General has general, inherent authority to supersede any municipal police department at will. The Court wrote: "The Legislature has the authority to address those questions directly and clarify its intent and expectations, should it decide to do so." (Id. at 26).
Historical Practice: 26 Supersessions in 25 Years
The Attorney General's Office has documented at least 26 agency-wide supersessions over the past 25 years. Of these, 17 involved county prosecutors superseding municipal police departments — including the well-known supersession of the Camden Police Department in the early 2000s.
Notably, the Camden supersession occurred without the consent of local officials. As amici in the Bulur case explained, "City officials in Camden did not consent" when then-Attorney General Verniero directed then-Prosecutor Lee Solomon to serve as monitor, and it was a "fight to reform" because "local political leaders were not in favor of the work that we were trying to do." (Bulur Amicus Brief of Former Attorneys General).
Applying the Law to Toms River: Would a Supersession Be Warranted?
Based solely on the public record documented in this article — and without access to any non-public investigative files — here is how a prosecutor or the Attorney General might analyze the Toms River situation.
Factors that would support supersession (or at least intervention):
Extraordinary leadership turnover: Three chiefs (or acting chiefs) in 18 months — of only six total since 1931 — could be viewed as evidence of instability at the top. In Bulur, the Attorney General cited "a revolving door of leadership" as one justification for superseding Paterson.
Staffing crisis: A police department operating at a 21-year low, well below the 173 officers recommended by a 2004 state study, raises serious questions about the department's ability to fulfill its mission.
Litigation and internal conflict: The Township is defending against multiple lawsuits involving the police department (Messina, Little). The fact that the Township itself sued OCPO suggests a breakdown in the ordinary working relationship between municipal and county law enforcement.
Lowered hiring standards with no results: Ordinance No. 4824-25 lowered educational requirements, yet not a single officer has been hired under the new standards.
The Council's own vote: The Township Council passed a minimum staffing ordinance of 162 officers. Mayor Rodrick vetoed it. The Council could not override. A prosecutor might argue that the legislative branch of the municipality itself has declared that the department is understaffed and that the executive branch is obstructing a solution.
Factors that would weigh against supersession:
No allegations of criminal misconduct: Unlike Paterson — where the Attorney General cited "high-profile cases of misconduct — some of it being criminal" — the Toms River situation appears to involve policy disputes, personnel conflicts, and alleged procedural violations, not criminal activity by officers.
No consent decree or pattern of civil rights violations: There is no indication in the public record that the Toms River Police Department is operating under a consent decree or has been found to have engaged in a pattern of constitutional violations.
The Bulur limitation: Because the Supreme Court in Bulur did not recognize a general, inherent supersession power, any attempt by OCPO or the AG to fully supersede Toms River would likely require either specific legislative authorization or a determination that the situation falls within some other statutory authority, such as the IAPP's internal affairs provisions.
The Most Likely Scenario: Incremental Intervention, Not Full Takeover
Based on the Bulur framework and historical practice, a full-scale supersession of the Toms River Police Department is unlikely — at least at this stage. The Paterson supersession was extraordinary, involving a specific legislative act and a $10 million appropriation.
What is far more likely — and what appears to be already occurring — is incremental intervention:
OCPO already asserted authority over the police department's page and radio access (the subject of the Township's lawsuit).
OCPO already sent a letter opposing the lowering of hiring standards.
The Attorney General's Office has already asserted authority to "supersede" an internal investigation into a minor personnel matter.
A prosecutor could argue that these incremental actions do not constitute a full "supersession" but rather the exercise of the "broad supervisory authority" that county prosecutors have always possessed over municipal police departments. Gerofsky, 376 N.J. Super. at 417.
What This Means for Toms River Residents
The Rodrick administration's lawsuit seeks a judicial declaration that OCPO has no authority over the police department's page, radio access, or hiring policies. If the Township wins, it would significantly curtail OCPO's supervisory authority — not just over Toms River, but potentially over all municipal police departments in Ocean County.
If OCPO wins (or if the court declines to issue the broad declaration the Township seeks), then OCPO retains the authority to intervene — incrementally or, in an extreme case, fully — when it determines that public safety requires it.
The Bulur decision left the ultimate scope of supersession authority unresolved. As the Supreme Court itself said, the Legislature must address the question directly. Until then, the boundaries of OCPO's authority over Toms River will be litigated — in Mercer County Superior Court, in the court of public opinion, and, if the staffing crisis continues to deteriorate, perhaps in the halls of the State House.
VIII. The November 2025 Election and Its Aftermath
The November 2025 election delivered a clear rebuke to Mayor Rodrick. Voters returned a council majority that is not loyal to the Mayor.
However, the majority lacks the supermajority (5 of 7) needed to override a mayoral veto. The result is a divided government: the Council can pass ordinances, but the Mayor can veto them, and the Council cannot override.
The minimum staffing ordinance — passed by the Council and vetoed by Rodrick — is a perfect illustration. The Council had the votes to pass it. It did not have the votes to override the veto that followed.
That dynamic now governs every major policy disagreement between the legislative and executive branches. The Council can propose. The Mayor can reject. And unless the Council can attract one more vote, the rejection stands.
Gridlock — not resolution — is the new normal.
IX. Benjamin Silkowitz – Termination and Lawsuit
On January 7, 2025, the Township Council passed a resolution consenting to the Mayor's appointment of Benjamin Silkowitz as Municipal Construction Official. (Silkowitz Complaint ¶ 17; Exhibit 😎. Silkowitz held multiple state licenses, including Construction Official, Plumbing Subcode Official, and Plumbing Inspector HHS. (Id. ¶ 16; Exhibit A).
On February 2, 2026, Acting Business Administrator Drew Chabot sent Silkowitz a one page letter stating that it "serves as formal notice of termination" effective immediately. (Id. ¶ 21; Exhibit D). The letter cited "sustained violations of the Township's Workplace Violence and Conflict of Interest Policies" and also stated that "grounds for discipline warranting termination also exist for insubordination and conduct unbecoming a public employee." (Exhibit D).
No written statement of specific charges was provided. No hearing was offered. No pre-termination notice or opportunity to respond was given. (Silkowitz Complaint ¶ 22).
Under N.J.A.C. 5:23A-2.2, a municipal construction official may only be removed "for cause" and "shall be given a written statement of the charges and a hearing."
On February 5, 2026, Silkowitz filed a Verified Complaint in the Superior Court of New Jersey, Ocean County, against the Township of Toms River, the Township Council, Mayor Rodrick (in his official capacity), and Acting Business Administrator Drew Chabot (in his official capacity). (Silkowitz Complaint).
He seeks immediate reinstatement, back pay and benefits, emotional distress damages, punitive damages, attorneys' fees, and a declaration that his termination is void from the start. (Id., Prayer for Relief).
X. The Silverton EMS Lawsuit
On October 21, 2024, the Township of Toms River filed a separate Verified Complaint in the Superior Court of New Jersey, Ocean County (Docket No. OCN-L-002730-24), against Silverton First Aid Squad, Inc. , and its President, Kevin Geoghegan — a former Toms River Council President (2020-2024). (Township v. Silverton Complaint).
The Township alleged:
Silverton EMS took over 24,000 gallons of fuel from Township pumps using key fobs obtained by Geoghegan — worth approximately $72,000. (Id. ¶¶ 21-22).
Silverton stopped paying the Township its 20% share of "load fees" under a 2019 Shared Services Agreement, keeping 100% of the fees collected beginning in mid-2021. (Id. ¶¶ 2, 15, 17, 59).
Silverton's revenue nearly tripled from 2020 to 2022 (from 462,423to1,134,815), while the Township received nothing. (Id. ¶¶ 33-36).
On November 21, 2024, Silverton and Geoghegan filed an Answer denying the material allegations and asserting eighteen affirmative defenses. (Answer ¶ 17). The case is in discovery.
Conclusion: The Cost of the War
Two-and-a-half years into the Rodrick administration, the scorecard is stark:
Five active lawsuits (Messina, Little, Silverton, OCPO, Silkowitz).
Four chiefs (or acting chiefs) since January 2024 — of only six total since 1931. (Little, Sundack, Maire, and now Scali as officer in charge during Maire's medical leave).
A police department with staffing at a 21 year low (145–151 sworn officers).
A 2004 state study recommended 173 officers; the Council recently sought 162 as a minimum.
The Council passed a minimum staffing ordinance; Mayor Rodrick vetoed it.
Lowered hiring standards (Ordinance No. 4824-25) — yet not a single officer has been hired under the new rules.
Now, with Chief Maire on medical leave and rumored to be not returning, and the ordinance requiring a chief's participation on the hiring committee, the department may be legally unable to hire anyone at all.
A construction official fired without statutory cause or hearing, now suing for reinstatement.
An ongoing legal battle with the Ocean County Prosecutor's Office over who controls the police department's page and radio dispatches — a battle that could determine the future scope of OCPO authority over every municipal police department in Ocean County.
Two high level appointees — Scott Tirella and Loring Dunton — who resigned after just one month, with Dunton warning that "fools go it alone."
Chief Guy Maire is now on medical leave, with sources reporting he was seen cleaning out his desk — a pattern that previously preceded the retirement of Acting Chief Peter Sundack. If Maire does not return, the department will be leaderless and, by its own ordinance, unable to hire.
Mayor Rodrick ran on a promise to cut waste and improve services. But the public record — the ordinances, the lawsuits, the recorded phone call, the judicial opinions, and now the revolving door of police chiefs — tells a different story. It is a story of executive fiat, legal brinkmanship, and a sustained war on the very agencies entrusted with public safety and security.
The Rodrick administration has, through its own actions, potentially disabled the police department's ability to hire anyone at all.
And it is far from over.
The staffing crisis, already at a 21-year low, is now on the verge of becoming a hiring shutdown. And with the Council lacking the votes to override a mayoral veto, there is no obvious path to amend the ordinance or appoint an interim chief who satisfies the Code's requirements.
The residents of Toms River are left to wait — for a chief who may not return, for a Council that cannot override, and for an administration that has shown no urgency in solving the very crisis it helped create.
"Fools go it alone."
Paul C. Williams is the founder of NJ Law Politics and Government which has been a 100% volunteer, uncompensated, endeavor, with a hope of helping to inform and enlighten the general public honestly, accurately, and objectively. No ads. No sponsors. Just the public's business, for the public.
This reporting is supported by documents, videos, court filings, news reports and the public record.
