A dispute over affordable housing obligations has erupted in Toms River after four council members voted to reject a settlement negotiated by the mayor’s administration.

In a statement released following the vote, Mayor Dan Rodrick said he was “outraged” by what he described as a “reckless and irresponsible decision” by Council members Bianchini, Nivison, Ciccozzi, and Bradley to block the agreement.

According to the mayor, the settlement was the result of months of negotiations aimed at dramatically reducing the township’s affordable housing obligations under state requirements.

When the state first calculated the town’s obligation, officials were facing a mandate to accommodate approximately 1,700 new affordable housing units, Rodrick said. Through negotiations and what he described as a “creative compliance strategy,” the administration worked to reduce that obligation to just 183 units of new construction.

A central component of the plan involved extending affordability controls on existing units for an additional 30 years. The mayor said that approach would preserve existing affordable housing while significantly limiting the amount of new development required.

Rodrick warned that the council’s decision could expose the township to legal challenges from developers.

If the original 1,700-unit obligation had to be satisfied through traditional 80/20 developments — projects in which 20 percent of units are designated as affordable — the result could be more than 8,000 total apartments, he said.

By rejecting the negotiated settlement, the council majority has now created what the mayor described as a “very real risk” of builder’s remedy lawsuits. Such lawsuits, commonly used by developers in New Jersey affordable housing disputes, can allow courts to override local zoning restrictions and permit large residential developments.

The mayor also suggested that the council’s actions could raise questions among residents.

“When decisions like this appear to benefit developers while putting the community in danger, residents are naturally going to ask whose interests are really being served,” the mayor said.

He also said his administration had attempted repeatedly to engage the council majority in discussions about the settlement before the vote.

According to the mayor, he made several attempts to bring council members into the process since they took office, including contacting them directly and visiting their homes to discuss the issue. He said he has already provided phone records documenting those attempts and is willing to release screenshots of text messages as well.

Despite those efforts, the mayor said, the council members declined to participate in negotiations and ultimately rejected the agreement.

“My administration negotiated a responsible solution that reduced the town’s obligation from 1,700 units to just 183 and protected our community from massive overdevelopment,” Rodrick said. “I will continue to fight to preserve that outcome and ensure residents understand exactly what is now at stake.”