Interoperability Concerns

Toms River Fire District 1: New Jersey's Only Fully Encrypted Fire Department

In a state where every other fire department maintains open radio communications for public safety and mutual aid coordination, Toms River Fire District 1 stands alone with a fully encrypted 700 MHz radio system. This decision has raised serious questions about interoperability, response coordination, and whether fire services should follow the same path as police encryption.

Key Facts at a Glance

Only 1 Fully encrypted fire dept in NJ
700 MHz Digital TRS system
Multiple Mutual aid jurisdictions affected
Zero Public input before decision

The Smoking Gun: Fire Chiefs Opposed This

On February 15, 2024, the Ocean County Fire Chiefs Association sent a formal letter to Township Administrator John Spodofora formally opposing the encryption plan. The letter wasn't from outside activists—it was signed by the fire service's own leadership, including Matthew Janora, Bureau Chief of Toms River Fire District 1.

From the Official Opposition Letter

"Encryption of Fire Department radio channels goes against the standard best practices nationwide."
— Ocean County Fire Chiefs Association, February 15, 2024

The letter laid out multiple concerns about encryption's impact on public safety, mutual aid coordination, and the fire service's mission. It represented the professional consensus of Ocean County's fire leadership—the people who actually respond to emergencies.

The Bitter Irony

The same Matthew Janora who signed this opposition letter would later complain at a January 2025 meeting that "a letter that was signed by the fire officers months ago opposing the encryption hit the airways," lamenting the "bad press" their own professional objections had caused. The opposition letter they authored became evidence against them.

Timeline: How It Happened

February 7, 2024

District 1 Board Meeting

Administrator Brian Kubiel discusses encryption plans. Commissioners question mutual aid implications.

February 15, 2024

Fire Chiefs Oppose Encryption

Ocean County Fire Chiefs Association formally opposes the plan in letter to Township Administrator, stating it "goes against standard best practices nationwide."

Throughout 2024

Planning Continues Despite Opposition

Officials proceed with encryption implementation despite professional objections from fire service leadership.

Late 2024

NDAs Sent to Mutual Aid Partners

Non-disclosure agreements sent to surrounding fire departments—an unusual step that raises questions about what officials want kept secret.

January 6, 2025

Fire Department Goes Dark

Toms River Fire District 1 encryption goes live. Fire communications now hidden from mutual aid partners, media, and public.

January 13, 2025

Police & EMS Follow

Police and EMS encryption activated. Township communications now fully encrypted.

January 15, 2025

Joint Board Meeting: Damage Control

Officials issue social media gag order, complain about "bad press" from their own opposition letter becoming public, and discuss containing the story.

Silencing the Opposition

As public criticism mounted following the encryption rollout, officials moved to control the narrative. At the January 15, 2025 Joint Board Meeting, the response wasn't to address concerns—it was to silence discussion.

The Gag Order

"Administrator Carson reminded all firefighters not to post anything on social media re: radio communication."
— Joint Board Meeting Minutes, January 15, 2025

But silencing their own members wasn't enough. Officials also required mutual aid partners—neighboring fire departments—to sign non-disclosure agreements:

NDAs for Mutual Aid Partners

"[Brian] Kubiel stated all non-disclosures agreements have been sent out to all our surrounding areas."
— Joint Board Meeting Minutes, January 15, 2025

Why NDAs?

What information about fire department radio communications is so sensitive that neighboring fire departments must sign confidentiality agreements? This isn't standard practice for mutual aid arrangements. It suggests officials are more concerned with controlling information than coordinating response.

Key Officials Involved

The decision to encrypt Toms River's fire communications—against professional recommendations—involved multiple officials who are accountable to the public:

Matthew Janora

Bureau Chief, District 1

Signed the Fire Chiefs Association letter opposing encryption in February 2024. Later complained at January 2025 meeting about "bad press" when that letter became public.

Brian Kubiel

Administrator, District 1

Led encryption implementation. Announced that NDAs had been sent to mutual aid partners and communicated timeline for go-live dates.

Administrator Carson

District 2

Issued the social media gag order instructing firefighters not to post about radio communications.

Charles Weinberger

Communications/Dispatch

Handled technical aspects of encryption implementation and coordination with township systems.

Fire District Commissioners are elected officials. Toms River residents have the power to hold them accountable at the ballot box for decisions made against professional fire service recommendations.

Why Fire Encryption Is Different

While police departments increasingly cite "officer safety" and "operational security" as justifications for encryption, fire departments operate under fundamentally different circumstances that make encryption particularly problematic:

Fire Services

  • Responding to known emergencies, not pursuing suspects
  • No adversarial relationship with those they serve
  • Heavy reliance on mutual aid from neighboring departments
  • Public benefit from knowing fire locations and road closures
  • No sensitive investigation details to protect

Police Services

  • May involve pursuit of fleeing suspects
  • Adversarial situations with potential criminals
  • More self-contained operations
  • Some tactical operations benefit from secrecy
  • May transmit sensitive personal information

The Key Question

What legitimate operational security reason does a fire department have for hiding from the public that there's a structure fire at 123 Main Street? Unlike police, fire departments don't have suspects who might listen to evade them.

The Interoperability Problem

Fire departments depend heavily on mutual aid—neighboring departments responding to assist with large incidents. In Ocean County and throughout New Jersey, this means departments must be able to communicate seamlessly during emergencies.

What Happens When Encryption Breaks Mutual Aid

🔥

Multi-Alarm Fire

A major structure fire requires response from multiple districts. Neighboring departments responding to Toms River can't monitor tactical communications without encryption keys.

🏠

Border Incidents

Fires near district boundaries require coordination. Departments like Silverton, Pleasant Plains, and others can't listen to Toms River's size-up reports while responding.

đź“»

Patch Requests

Mutual aid departments must request patches to communicate—adding delay and complexity during time-critical operations when seconds matter.

"So much for seamless interoperability."

— Scanner community observer, after mutual aid departments had to request patches during a Toms River residential fire

The 700 MHz Digital System

Toms River operates on a 700 MHz Trunked Radio System (TRS), part of a broader push by the FCC for public safety agencies to move to digital frequencies. While digital systems offer technical advantages, the decision to fully encrypt is separate from the choice of radio technology.

Technical Reality

  • Digital doesn't require encryption: Many departments use digital radio systems while keeping communications open
  • The FCC mandates interoperability channels remain unencrypted: National interoperability calling channels must stay in the clear
  • Encryption is a policy choice: Toms River chose to encrypt—the technology didn't require it

What Other Departments Do

Throughout New Jersey and nationwide, fire departments have found ways to address any legitimate privacy concerns without full encryption:

Open Primary Channels

Keep main dispatch and tactical channels open for coordination and public information.

Encrypted Tactical Only

Reserve encryption for specific sensitive operations, if any exist for fire services.

Cell Phone for Sensitive Info

Use phones for any truly private communications rather than encrypting everything.

Partial Information Policy

Train dispatchers to limit sensitive details over radio—no encryption needed.

Impact on the Community

Toms River residents and the broader community have been affected in multiple ways:

Lost Situational Awareness

Residents can no longer monitor fire activity in their neighborhood. During active fires, they can't determine if roads are closed or if they should evacuate.

Volunteer Firefighter Concerns

Some volunteer members have raised concerns about the decision, creating internal discord within the fire service community.

Media Information Gap

Local news can no longer provide real-time fire information to residents, relying instead on delayed official statements.

Neighboring Jurisdiction Friction

Mutual aid departments have expressed frustration with the coordination challenges encryption creates.

The Broader Pattern in New Jersey

While Toms River Fire District 1 stands alone among fire departments, the encryption trend in New Jersey follows a broader pattern:

  • Police departments increasingly encrypting: Many NJ police agencies have moved to encrypted systems
  • Fire departments holding the line: Every other fire department in NJ maintains open communications
  • The question: Why is one fire district so different?

"Hopefully they won't go the way of Toms River."

— Comment on RadioReference forums when another township discussed radio changes

This comment reflects the concern within the public safety community that Toms River's decision could set a troubling precedent—even though no other New Jersey fire department has followed suit.

Fire Encryption Elsewhere: Lessons Learned

Other jurisdictions that have tried fire encryption have often reversed course after experiencing real-world problems:

Washington, DC Fire

Encrypted fire communications, then reversed the decision after radio encryption hindered the response to a subway incident. The interoperability problems were simply too dangerous.

Orange County, CA Fire

After encrypting all first responder channels in 2019, the fire chief acknowledged "the switchboards lit up" with complaints. Officials have actively sought to reverse fire channel encryption.

Chicago Area (2025)

13 fire departments in northwest Chicago suburbs quietly encrypted radio communications, drawing immediate criticism from transparency advocates.

What the Fire Service Community Says

Professional fire service organizations and experienced firefighters have generally opposed blanket encryption:

Mutual Aid Concerns

"Interoperability with other fire departments—such as in disasters or large-scale incidents requiring mutual aid—could be hindered if a department does not possess encryption-capable radios."

Public Safety Mission

Unlike police, fire departments exist to protect—not pursue. Public awareness of fire activity helps communities take appropriate action.

Volunteer Firefighter Access

Many volunteer firefighters monitor scanners to respond faster. Encryption creates barriers to volunteer response.

What Ocean County Residents Can Do

Attend Fire Commissioner Meetings

Toms River Fire District 1 is governed by elected commissioners. Attend meetings and voice concerns about encryption and interoperability.

Contact Elected Officials

Township and county officials may not be aware of the interoperability concerns. Educate them about the issue.

Support Mutual Aid Departments

Neighboring fire departments that maintain open communications deserve community support.

Request Public Records

File OPRA requests to understand the decision-making process that led to encryption.

The Bottom Line

The Toms River Fire case is extraordinary not because of the encryption itself, but because of what the primary source documents reveal: fire service professionals formally opposed this decision, and officials responded not by reconsidering—but by silencing dissent.

When the Ocean County Fire Chiefs Association's opposition letter became public, officials didn't defend their decision on the merits. Instead, they issued gag orders, demanded NDAs from mutual aid partners, and complained about "bad press." The very letter signed by Bureau Chief Matthew Janora became the "problem" he later lamented.

This isn't a case of well-intentioned officials making a difficult call. This is a case of officials overruling their own fire service experts, then scrambling to hide the evidence.

The question isn't why one fire district is different from every other in New Jersey. The question is: What are they so afraid of the public knowing?

Take Action for Transparency

Your voice matters. Here are concrete ways to advocate for open police communications in your community.

đź“§

Contact Your Representatives

Use our templates to email your local officials about police radio encryption policies.

Get Started
📚

Read Case Studies

See how encryption has affected real communities - from Highland Park to Chicago.

View Cases
📢

Spread Awareness

Share evidence about police radio encryption with your network and community.

📊

See the Evidence

Review the facts, myths, and research on police radio encryption.

View Evidence
🎤

Public Testimony

Learn how to speak effectively at city council and public safety meetings.

Prepare to Speak
📥

Download Resources

Get FOIA templates, talking points, and materials for advocacy.

Access Toolkit