New Jersey Public Safety Officers Law Blog

New Jersey
Public Safety Officers Law Blog

Dedicated to Corrections Officers, Policemen, & Firemen throughout the Garden State

NJ Budget To Include Full Scheduled Pension Payment

Posted in Public Employment Pension Crisis

Pension Crisis

As reported by, Governor Christie said his last budget proposal that will be revealed later this month will include a pension payment that meets the promised contribution schedule.  To this end, Christie said the payment will be a $650 million increase over last.  At that time, Christie proposed a $1.86 billion payment to the declining government worker pension system that he ultimately approved in the final budget sent to him by lawmakers.

“Yeah,” Christie responded when “Ask the Governor” host Eric Scott asked whether this year’s budget would include the full scheduled payment for the year.  Christie is scheduled to give his final budget address on February 28.  “It is a challenge,” Christie said. He was referring to the ballooning pension payment weighed against the other spending priorities for the State.

The Governor said he’s “85 percent done” with the proposed budget and doesn’t “think they’ll be any bug surprises.”  But when Scott asked if pension and health benefit reform or school funding reform would work its way into the budget, Christie responded: “Could be. Stay tuned”

Last year, Christie announced he would contribute $1.86 billion into the pension system.  The proposed payment was the largest in New Jersey history, but also just 40 percent of what actuaries recommended. The Governor ultimately signed the $34.8 billion budget lawmakers sent him that closely resembled his original proposal, including the $1.86 billion pension payment.

Please continue to check this blog periodically to ascertain updates regarding the proposed pension payment.  As we know, the amount of the pension payment has spawned legal challenges in the past and has a direct impact upon all New Jersey Public Safety Officers.

New Bill Proposes $2 Room Surcharge at A.C. Hotels to Avoid Police and Firefighter Layoffs

Posted in Public Employment Labor Law

AC Police

As reported by, guests at Atlantic City hotels may soon see a new $2 surcharge on their room bills to help avoid police and firefighter layoffs in the financially struggling seaside gambling resort.

Assembly Speaker Vincent Prieto on Tuesday proposed a bill that would temporarily charge hotels in the city a $2 tax or fee to help avoid layoffs that Gov. Chris Christie’s administration seeks in the city’s public safety department in the ongoing state takeover of the local government.

Under the measure (A4556), the tax would last for two years and proceeds would be used exclusively to help fund the city’s public safety.

“I was adamant that any state takeover of Atlantic City not involve, among other things, police and firefighter layoffs that would threaten public safety and the city’s efforts to market itself as a safe and family-friendly destination, but not everyone agreed,” Prieto (D-Hudson) said in a statement.

“The harsh reality is now setting in, sadly, but I will not stand idle and allow police and firefighter layoffs to harm public safety for residents while also hurting the public’s ability to feel confident about visiting the city. Atlantic City must remain successful for the betterment of the entire state.”

Prieto’s office did not immediately have an estimate of how much the legislation would raise each year.

But by comparison, the city’s Casino Redevelopment Authority charges hotels a $3-per-room fee, which raised $11.8 million in 2005.

The city has been rocked by five casinos closing in recent years, and Christie’s administration moved in November to seize control of key functions of city hall — including the ability to break union contracts and hire and fire employees.

Public safety unions are expecting the Republican governor to seek deep cuts in police and fire.

Christie’s office did not immediately return a message seeking comment Tuesday.

But Jeff Albrecht, the chairman of Meet AC, the city’s convention bureau, told the Press of Atlantic City that he is skeptical of the idea, noting that city hotels already pay state, luxury, casino, occupancy, and promotion taxes and fees.

Meet AC commissioned a study last year that show Atlantic City hotels already carry some of the highest room taxes in the nation.

“We would tell the state or whomever, that all businesses should be included, not just hospitality,” Albrecht told the newspaper. “Tourism is the number one economic-driver, not just for Atlantic City, but the entire county. … If we don’t do more to stimulate and protect it, we are all going to lose.”

Intelligence Sharing Agreement Between Obama and Cuba Fails to Include the Return of Convicted NJ Fugitive that Murdered a NJ State Trooper

Posted in Uncategorized


As reported in NJ.COM, The head of the New Jersey State Police, Colonel Rick Fuentes, renounced an agreement struck between the Obama administration and Cuba to share information on international criminal activity because it did not require the return of convicted cop killer Joanne Chesimard.

Some Republicans also renounced the deal partly because of objections to sharing sensitive information with the Castro regime and because it did not require the island nation to extradite high-profile U.S. fugitives it has been harboring.

Chesimard, who goes by Assata Shakur and was convicted for the 1973 killing of New Jersey State Trooper Werner Foerster.  Chesimard later escaped prison and fled to Cuba, where she holds asylum status and maintains her innocence.

In a statement released on Thursday, Colonel Fuentes, who for years has led the campaign for Chesimard’s return to serve her murder sentence, expressed “bewilderment and confusion” at the agreement.  The colonel criticized the deal for not requiring the return of Chesimard as well as fugitives Victor Luis Gerena, Charlie Hill and William Guillermo Morales.

“Their omission from this agreement and from the negotiations-at-large is so glaring as to signal a clear intent by the Obama administration to ignore these fugitives,” Fuentes said.

“By burning the last bridge to this administration’s opportunity to gain their negotiated return, families who have long suffered the consequences of their terrorist acts and law enforcement everywhere in this country have been shown the back of the hand.”

One last striking blow by the Obama Administration in its treatment of Law Enforcement Officers.

USDOT States that Painting a “Thin Blue Line” in between a Double Yellow Highway Dividing Line is Illegal

Posted in Uncategorized

Blue Line

As reported in NJ.Com, the U.S. Department of Transportation has opined that painting blue lines in between double yellow highway dividing lines is an unsafe practice and must therefore be removed.  In October, many New Jersey towns painted blue lines in the middle of downtown roads to show support for law enforcement.  The support at that time came in the wake of unprecedented attacks that were being perpetrated on law enforcement officers throughout the United States.

One New Jersey County asked The U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration to weigh in on the legality of the practice.  In response, the USDOTFHA stated that “There are many appropriate and fitting ways to recognize service to the public that do not involve the modification of a traffic control device, which can put the road user at risk due to misinterpretation of its meaning,”  This opinion came from a December 8 letter from the Federal Highway Administration to the Somerset County Engineering Division who inquired about the practice.

“The use of blue lines as part of centerline markings does not comply with the provisions of the MUTCD (Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways),” the letter states.  The USDOTFHA says the space in between the double yellow lines should remain empty. In certain cases, black paint can be used “where a light-colored pavement does not provide sufficient contrast with the markings,” the MUTCD states.

It is our understanding that when towns first started painting the blue lines on county roads, local officials said they did so only after receiving permission from the county.  There has been no response from either the County of Somerset or the Towns that have painted the roads as to whether they will remove the “thin blue line” that has been painted in-between the double yellow.

In the area of New Jersey where I am from, the center of a double yellow line is painted to mark a parade route twice a year.  It is painted green in March for the annual Saint Patrick’s Day Parade and then adorns the colors of the Italian flag in October to commemorate Columbus Day.  This has been going on for as long as I can remember.  The colors remain on the road for months; and as far as I know there are no complaints from either citizens, the Towns, nor the County.

However, I find it interesting that when the center of a double yellow line is painted blue to honor our Law Enforcement Officers we now learn that such actions are in essence “illegal” and should be deemed a safety concern.  Really?

As we sit back on National Law Enforcement Appreciation Day, I want to thank each and every Law Enforcement Officer for all that they do each day of the year to keep me and my family safe.  As I travel the State of New Jersey today representing many of these Officers I hope I see more of the thin blue lines on our roadways as a reminder to America’s citizens of  the service these brave men and women provide to us on a daily basis.

Correction Officers Renew Calls for Better Workers’ Compensation After Brutal Attack

Posted in Sick Leave Injury Benefits


As reported by, the recent brutal attack on a State Correction Officer at East Jersey State Prison has union officials calling for the passage of a bill that would make compensation similar to that of police officers and firefighters injured on duty.

On the morning of December 31, Daniel Campione, a Correction Officer at the prison, was escorting inmates back to their cells and securing the cells when an inmate “began to verbally abuse” Campione.  The inmate ultimately charged the officer and began “hitting him in his head with a closed fist,” according to a statement released from the Policemen’s Benevolent Association Local 105 (“P.B.A. #105”), which represents New Jersey’s rank-and-file correction officers. Correction officers in the area responded and gained control of the inmate.

Campione was treated at the prison for “numerous contusions and lacerations on his head and face.”  He was then taken to Robert Wood Johnson Hospital in Rahway for further treatment.  He is expected to recover from his injuries, officials said, but will be unable to work for an unknown period of time.

P.B.A. #105 President Brian Renshaw said, “Attacks like the one we saw…are becoming all too common in New Jersey’s state prisons.” Renshaw is now calling for the passage of a bill introduced two years ago to ensure officers “will not be asked to receive anything less than full pay for injuries suffered at the hands of inmates inside our prisons,” the statement said.  According to the Union, passing the bill would give correction officers similar compensation to that of state and local police officers injured while on duty.

Currently, prison and juvenile detention workers must apply for workers’ compensation when injured on the job, the union said “making significantly less than their regular salary.”  Renshaw added, “It is my hope that the New Jersey Legislature will fully understand what is at risk when deciding on how to act on this legislation.”

Christie Signs Bill Mandating Quarterly Pension Payments by State

Posted in Public Employment Pension Crisis

Pension Crisis

As reported by, Gov. Chris Christie on Thursday signed a bill that will require the state to make quarterly payments to New Jersey’s ailing public worker pension system.

The bill is a reworked version of a measure Christie twice vetoed.

The new law will require governor to make pension payments on a quarterly basis by Sept. 30, Dec. 31, March 31 and June 30 of each year, instead of at the end of the fiscal year in June. In exchange, the pension fund would reimburse state treasury for any losses incurred if the state has to borrow money to make a payment.

State lawmakers voted overwhelmingly last month to approve the measure. It cleared the state Senate by a 35-0 vote and the state Assembly 72-0.

The legislation (S2810) resembled a provision of a proposed constitutional amendment that would have required the state to make a full pension payment suggested by actuaries each year.

However, Senate President Stephen Sweeney (D-Gloucester), who pushed the amendment, pulled his support for it over concerns about the state’s ability to make the payment which drew outrage from public worker unions.

On Thursday, Sweeney said making pension quarterly pension payments “will provide greater stability to state finances, produce ongoing savings for the taxpayers and help make the pension funds more secure.m A scheduled timetable for making the already-required payments will help correct the costly and irresponsible mistakes of the past when contributions were delayed, deferred or ignored altogether.”

In his 2014 veto of the bill, Christie called it “an improper and unwarranted intrusion upon the longstanding executive prerogative to determine the appropriate timing of payments” so those expenditures line up with tax collection cycles.

But the change in the bill to have the pension fund pick up the cost of borrowing if needed may address the governor’s previous concerns.

Hetty Rosenstein, state director Communications Workers of America, praised the bill, but stressed she’s focused on demanding the state make full payments.

“CWA supports quarterly pension payments,” she said. “However, unless the full amount due to the plan is appropriated, quarterly payments are meaningless. History shows we simply cannot rely on the word of the governor or Legislature when it comes to the pension.”

Last month, the state’s credit rating dropped for a record 10th time during Christie’s administration.

Standard and Poor’s Global Ratings lowered the state’s rating from “A” to “A-“. The move comes after the rating agency revised its outlook for New Jersey from stable to negative over concerns with the declining pension funding levels and rising retirement liabilities.

Decades of underfunding have weakened the pension system, as have more recent poor investment returns. The fund lost 0.87 percent in the fiscal year that ended in June, based on unaudited figures, and investment returns in the year before were 4.16 percent.

As of July 1, 2015, New Jersey’s state and local pension funds have just 37.5 percent of the funding it needs to pay for future benefits. That is based on new reporting standards that require the state to project lower investment returns and had bleak consequences for the state’s estimates.

New Jersey joins California, Indiana, North Carolina and Pennsylvania in states that have rules requiring quarterly pension payments.

Christie Signs Bill Allowing Retired Officers to Provide Security for NJ Schools

Posted in Contract Negotiations, Public Employment Labor Law

School Cop

As reported by, specially trained retired police officers may be hired to provide security for public and private schools and community colleges in New Jersey under a bill Gov. Chris Christie signed into law Wednesday.

The governor conditionally vetoed an earlier version of the legislation two months ago because it did not require these “special law enforcement officers” to undergo “specialized training covering security issues that routinely arise in the school setting.”

“It is vital to ensure that the officer in integrated into the unique setting of a school community and is properly trained to function not only as a safety expert and law enforcer, but also as a liaison to community resources, educators and counselors,” Christie said in that conditional veto message.

The bill’s sponsors made the changes Christie sought. The bill (S86) was approved by the state Senate in October and by the Assembly on Nov. 21.

 “Having trained, experienced officers in schools creates a safer environment for students and staff by deterring criminals from committing acts of violence,” state Sen. Anthony Bucco (R-Morris) said, one of the bill’s sponsors. “I’m happy we could work together on this issue and make our schools safer for everyone.”

The bill was first introduced after the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre in Newtown, Conn. four years ago.

These armed “class III special officers” must be under 65 years old and undergo the requisite training, according to the bill. They may work no more than 20 hours a week, and are not entitled to health or pension benefits for their service.

They would not replace school resource officers, who are specially trained full-time police officers stationed at some schools. However, as noted in our September blog covering the earlier version of this bill, it is yet to be seen whether these new positions will cut into future jobs regularly assigned to active police officers.

The legislation was sought after by the New Jersey State Association of Chiefs of Police. North Plainfield Police Chief William Parenti, the association’s president, thanked the governor and lawmakers for getting the law passed.

 “Nothing is more important than the safety of our children, and we strongly believe that this law gives our state an important new tool in providing a safer environment for our school kids, our teachers, and everyone else who works at or visits schools and community colleges in our state,” Parenti said in a statement.


Christie’s Attempt to Dismantle the NJ Civil Service System through the Initiation of “Job Banding” is Illegal

Posted in Uncategorized

Gavel Slam

As reported in NJ.Com, a New Jersey appeals court Thursday struck down controversial changes Governor Christie’s administration unilaterally made to the state’s civil service system.  The Appellate Division on the New Jersey Superior Court stated in its decision that the state’s Civil Service Commission was wrong to push forward with the “job-banding” changes over the objections of the state Legislature, which voted numerous times to invalidate the regulations.

The ruling is a victory for the Legislature’s Democratic leaders and a pair of public-worker unions: the Communications Workers of America and the International Federation of Professional & Technical Engineers, Local 195. All of them sued to reverse the changes.

Christie’s administration could carry on the fight by petitioning the State Supreme Court to take on the case. Leland Moore, a spokesman for the state attorney general’s office, said the office is “reviewing the decision” and declined further comment.

Under the rule changes made by the Christie administration, the Civil Service Commission was allowed to group some positions together as part of “job bands,” allowing managers to promote workers without the need for competitive exams. State officials said the goal was to save money and make the process more flexible.

But union leaders, Democratic lawmakers, and other critics of the Republican governor, said the new rules would open the civil service system up to the kind of political patronage, nepotism, and discrimination it was created to guard against.

The Legislature passed numerous resolutions in 2013 and 2014 to invalidate the changes, saying they violated the legislative intent of the state constitution. But the Civil Service Commission — whose members are appointed by Christie — made minor amendments each time to keep the new rules alive.

But writing for the appellate panel, Judge Douglas Fasciale said the Legislature  “validly exercised its authority” and that the commission’s amendments “consistently ignored the Legislature’s steadfast substantive objection to job banding without competitive promotional examinations.”

This is yet another decision striking down the one sided policy initiatives instituted by the Christie Administration against public employees.  Inauguration Day, 2018 can’t get here soon enough.

Agencies Barred From Unilaterally Changing Terms of Bargaining Agreement, Court Rules

Posted in Contract Negotiations, Pay and Overtime


As reported by the New Jersey Law Journal, public employers do not have a unilateral right to change the terms of a collective bargaining agreement with their workers merely by citing an economic crisis, the New Jersey Supreme Court ruled on Tuesday.

In a 6-0 ruling, the state’s highest court said a local school board, which was hit with a drastic loss in state and local funding in 2010, violated the law when it decided to impose involuntary furloughs to save money after three failed attempts to open negotiations with the town’s teachers’ union..

The court remanded the matter back to the Public Employment Relations Commission to determine whether the union members should be awarded the money they lost in salary during the furloughs.

It has been estimated that the union members together lost about $200,000 in pay because of the furloughs.

The Robbinsville Board of Education imposed the three-day furloughs for all teachers for the 2010-11 school year after it already had cut education programs, froze salaries and laid off 13 employees. The board’s moves came after the administration of Republican Gov. Chris Christie told the district its state funding would be cut by 58 percent because of financial distress, and after the township government also said local funding would be cut.

The board’s decision was upheld on summary judgment by the state Public Employment Relations Commission, which handles disputes between public agencies and public employees, and by the Appellate Division.

Both PERC and the appeals court relied heavily on the Supreme Court’s 2015 ruling in Borough of Keyport v. International Union of Operating Engineers. In that decision, a divided court ruled that three local governments did not commit unfair labor practices when they developed layoff plans following the 2008 economic crisis.

In 2009, Keyport and the union entered into a collective bargaining agreement that said if there were to be layoffs, the town would respect union members’ seniority rights.

Justice Jaynee LaVecchia, writing for the court in In re Robbinsville Board of Education v. Washington Township Education Association, said the commission and the Appellate Division gave an “overly broad and mistaken reading” of Keyport, which she said involved unique circumstances.

In upholding the board’s right to impose the furloughs despite not being part of the bargaining agreement, the commission said the “decision to impose temporary furloughs in the current economic times was a non-negotiable managerial prerogative.”

LaVecchia said that PERC and the appeals court should have been guided by the court’s 1982 ruling in In re Local 195, IFPTE v. New Jersey. There, the court said there should be a three-prong test to determine if a public employer’s actions regarding its employees violated the Public Employer-Employee Relations Act.

A matter must be found to be negotiable if it “intimately and directly” impacts the work and welfare of public employees, the matter has not been preempted by statute or regulation and the negotiated agreement does not adversely affect governmental policy, the court said in Local 195.

She also quoted the court’s 2001 ruling in Troy v. Rutgers, which stated that “a decision that directly impacts the days worked and compensation for those days implicate a term and condition of employment,” making the decision “mandatorily-negotiable.”

LaVecchia noted, however, that Keyport towns that laid off employees were acting with the blessing of a temporary emergency regulation, which was issued by the state Civil Service Commission because of the national economic downturn.

“The appellate decision undervalued the lack here of an emergency regulation permitting temporary furloughs,” she said. “The regulation’s existence made all the difference in Keyport.

Keyport does not support the award of summary judgment to the board,” LaVecchia said.

LaVecchia did chide the union for refusing to negotiate with the board, saying members “disregarded their duties” despite the economic circumstances facing the board.


Pension Bill Requiring Quarterly Payments Heads To Christie’s Desk

Posted in Public Employment Pension Crisis

Coins falling into jam jar labelled pension.

As reported by, lawmakers voted overwhelmingly to send Governor Chris Christie a bill that will require the State to make quarterly payments to New Jersey’s ailing public worker system.  The proposal, which cleared the Senate by a 35-0 vote and the Assembly 72-0, is a reworked version of similar legislation Christie twice vetoed.  It would require the Governor to make pension payments on a quarterly basis by September 30, December 31, March 31, and June 30 of each year, instead of at the end of the fiscal year in June.  In exchange, the pension fund would reimburse the State Treasury for any losses incurred if the State has to borrow money to make a payment.

The bill resembles a provision of a proposed constitutional amendment that Senate President Stephen Sweeney once back before pulling his support over concerns about the State’s ability to make the payment.  Sweeney’s reversal drew outrage from public worker unions. In his 2014 veto of the bill, Christie called it “an improper and unwarranted intrusion upon the longstanding executive prerogative to determine the appropriate timing of payments” so those expenditures line up with tax collection cycles.  But the change in the bill which would have the pension fund pick up the cost of borrowing if needed may address the Governor’s concerns.

The bill’s passing was met with only a lukewarm response from the State’s largest public worker union, the Communications Workers of America, which favors a constitutional amendment to require full pension payments.  “CWA supports quarterly pension payments. However, unless the full amount due to the plan is appropriated, quarterly payments are meaningless,” Hetty Rosenstein, state director of CWA NJ, said.

Decades of underfunding have weakened the pension system, as have more recent poor investment returns. The fund lost 0.87 percent in the fiscal year that ended in June, based on unaudited figures, and investment returns in the year before were 4.16 percent.  As of July 1, 2015, New Jersey’s state and local pension funds have just 37.5 percent of the funding it needs to pay for future benefits.  That is based on new reporting standards that require the State to project lower investment returns and had bleak consequences for the State’s estimates.  If Christie signs the measure, New Jersey would join California, Indiana, North Carolina, and Pennsylvania in states that have rules requiring quarterly pension payments.

Please continue to check this blog periodically to ascertain updates regarding this bill.