Salvador Rizzo

Trenton Bureau

A rare uprising took hold of the State House on Monday as rank-and-file lawmakers from both parties killed a controversial bill that would have allowed Governor Christie to cash in on a book-publishing deal and give hefty raises to his Cabinet officers, judges and legislative aides.

A separate piece of legislation Christie wanted — the so-called “newspaper revenge” bill — was pulled from the agenda late in the evening by its lead sponsor, Assembly Speaker Vincent Prieto, who failed to muster the 41 votes needed for passage. That bill will be debated again next year, Prieto said.

It was a stunning turn of events for Christie, who was once regarded as a master of cutting deals with New Jersey’s Democratic political bosses and muscling the bills through the Legislature.

CHRISTIE: No votes called on book deal, newspaper ad bill

EDITORIAL: Orange went dry for Christie

POLLUTION: Environmental funding, Highlands protections move ahead

And it highlighted his diminished clout as a governor with an 18 percent approval rating, who mounted a failed bid for the Republican presidential nomination this year, and then was passed over for a top job in President-elect Donald Trump’s administration despite being an early supporter. Even Lt. Gov. Kim Guadagno, a Republican likely to run for governor next year, publicly derided the proposed salary increases in Christie’s book legislation.

The plan Christie quietly negotiated with leading lawmakers — to let him profit from a book while in office, hike salaries across all three branches of government, and cut in on newspapers’ revenue — was first reported 10 days ago by The Record.

Prieto and Senate President Stephen Sweeney, D-Gloucester, attempted to rush the bills through the Legislature within the space of a week, before cost estimates could be published. They had scheduled final votes for Monday, the last day of the year for legislative business.

Christie’s book bill appeared to be safely on track for final passage as recently as Thursday, when it sailed through Assembly and Senate committee hearings with wide margins and bipartisan support. But that support quickly crumbled, according to Democrats and Republicans.

Assembly Minority Leader Jon Bramnick, one of Christie’s closest Republican allies, said the salary hikes included in the book legislation sparked a lethal public backlash. The raises would have cost New Jersey taxpayers more than $10 million a year, according to the nonpartisan Office of Legislative Services, at a time of deep budget cuts for hospitals, public-worker pensions and schools.

“Raising salaries should be a concern for the public,” said Bramnick, R-Union, adding that the plan divided his caucus on Monday. “That bill is not going anywhere.”

Prieto, D-Secaucus, said the bill would not be debated again.

“You pick a member,” Prieto said of Democrats. “Some of them, it was the book deal. Some of them, it was in reference to the raises and the cost of it. So it was an array of things, and the caucus felt at this point in time there was no support for it.”

EDITORIAL: Fighting for a free press

STILE: Ending legal ad law gives mayors new payback power

'WELFARE': Experts say lawmakers ignoring $7.4B boom in 'corporate welfare'

In exchange for approving the raises for legislative aides, judges, Cabinet officers, county prosecutors and others, Christie had asked leading lawmakers to relax a state ethics law that restricts him to his $175,000 salary as his only source of income, Democrats said. The bill Christie wanted would have created an exemption on income from book deals and other publishing contracts, not just for the governor, but also for his Cabinet members and top aides.

Christie also asked lawmakers to revive a bill to allow official legal notices to be published online as an alternative to printed newspapers.

State law currently requires legal notices — advertisements for bid opportunities, public hearings, sheriffs’ sales and other official business — to be printed in newspapers as a transparency measure. Christie argued that taxpayers and businesses would save $80 million a year by publishing those notices online instead. His office, however, has refused to break down Christie’s cost estimate or provide supporting documentation.

Newspaper publishers furiously lobbied against the legal notices bill, arguing that it would hurt their revenue streams and cause hundreds of layoffs. The New Jersey Press Association sharply disputed Christie’s $80 million figure, estimating the cost at $8 million a year for taxpayers and $12 million for businesses, according to a 2010 study.

Legislative sources told The Record that Christie revived the bill as a way to punish New Jersey newspapers for their adversarial coverage. But his office has denied it.

After the newspaper bill was pulled Monday evening, a spokesman for Christie, Jeremy Rosen, vowed that it would be “a top priority when we return from the holidays.”

“The governor has fought this fight for the taxpayers for seven years, and he will continue this fight at the beginning of year eight,” Rosen said. He did not respond to a request for comment on the bill concerning Christie’s book and salary increases.

“This is a win for every resident of New Jersey,” said Tom Donovan, chairman of the New Jersey Press Association and northeast regional president of the Gannett East Group, which includes The Record and six other New Jersey newspapers. “I’m pleased that the legislators pulled the bill from this year’s voting session. Transparency matters, and the level of engagement from New Jersey residents was powerful.”

Senate Majority Leader Loretta Weinberg, D-Teaneck, who opposed both bills, said Christie should devote his last year in office to a litany of problems more pressing than where to publish legal notices. She mentioned safety issues at NJ Transit, pay equity between men and women, a new Port Authority bus terminal, the Gateway Tunnel, gun-control measures to protect victims of domestic violence and the $135.7 billion in unfunded pension liabilities, according to Bloomberg estimates.

“If the governor thinks this is the top priority for the new year … he’s more out of touch than we thought,” Weinberg said.

Assemblyman John Burzichelli, D-Gloucester, said it appeared Prieto scheduled both bills for Assembly votes on Monday without rounding up the required 41 votes.

"It became clear throughout the day that he was very busy," Burzichelli said of Prieto.

Assemblyman John Wisniewski, D-Middlesex, said Democrats spent four hours at a caucus meeting questioning the merits of the newspaper bill and trying to reconcile the disparity between Christie’s financial estimates and those put out by the press association.

“Here we are legislating a major policy change on how notices are provided,” said Wisniewski, who is running for governor. “And the answer to why is, well, ‘Towns tell us this will be good.’ But we don’t have any specific towns, we don’t have any specific cost analysis.”

In a statement Monday evening, Prieto said “the caucus engaged in a robust discussion today about the publication of legal ads and, clearly, opinions varied as to how best we can maintain transparency in this ever-evolving information age.”

“We will continue this discussion and consider all options,” he added.

Senate Democrats held off on discussing the bills at their own caucus meeting Monday, waiting for the Assembly to act first. "We had no discussion in our caucus on either bill,” said Sen. Paul Sarlo, D-Wood-Ridge. “We didn't talk about compromises. We didn't talk about anything."

Assemblywoman Amy Handlin, R-Monmouth, who opposed both bills, said they were defeated on Monday because of a huge public backlash. Her office received 500 emails and the phones “rang off the hook,” Handlin said.

“People should know that through their actions and speaking out, they were heard,” she said.

This byline on this article was changed to reflect the proper author, Salvador Rizzo. Record Staff Writer Dustin Racioppi and Asbury Park Press Staff Writer Bob Jordan contributed to this article.