Four Republicans on the Assembly Budget Committee want a state agency to investigate and block a Newark City Council resolution that would grant taxpayer-funded lifetime health benefits as a gift to Carlos M. Gonzalez, who leaves office on June 30 after twenty years as a Newark councilman.
Assemblymen Brian E. Rumpf (R-Little Egg Harbor), Gerry Scharfenberger (R-Middletown), Al Barlas (R-Cedar Grove), and Michael Inganamort (R-Chester) sent a letter Wednesday to Division of Local Government Services Director Michael Rogers, urging the state to reject what they called a “one-time rule relaxation” that would allow Gonzalez to receive benefits typically reserved for city employees with at least twenty-five consecutive years of service.
The assemblymen alleged that the proposal would improperly extend an employee benefit to an elected official who does not meet the city’s service requirement.
“If this resolution is adopted, it represents a troubling example of political insiders rewarding one another with a taxpayer-funded benefit while the residents of Newark and New Jersey struggle with rising costs, property taxes, and healthcare expenses,” the lawmakers said. “The proposal is particularly offensive given Newark’s dependence on state taxpayers.”
They want the state to determine whether the arrangement violates state law or constitutes an improper enhancement of compensation.
Their request comes one day after the New Jersey Globe reported that Newark planned to award Gonzalez lifetime health benefits in recognition of his “long and faithful service,” despite the city’s ongoing efforts to maintain and increase more than $110 million in annual state municipal aid. The proposed resolution describes the benefit as a special exception for Gonzalez, who first won election to the council in 2006 and did not seek re-election this year.
In their letter, the Republicans asked Local Government Services, which conducts oversight of municipal budgets, to immediately investigate the proposal, review its long-term fiscal impact, determine whether it complies with state statutes and regulations, and take whatever action is necessary to prevent its implementation if it is found to be inconsistent with state law or the public interest. They also argued that Newark taxpayers — and taxpayers statewide — should not be required to subsidize lifetime benefits for outgoing elected officials.
The legislators went further, suggesting that the state consider withholding aid, if necessary, to prevent the benefit from taking effect.