New Plan to Hire Lakewood Schools Attorney Could End Deadlock

The Shift Toward In-House Legal Representation in Lakewood Schools

The Lakewood School District is considering a major change in its approach to legal services. Instead of continuing to rely on high-cost outside attorneys, the district may soon hire a full-time, in-house lawyer. This move comes after multiple failed attempts to reappoint former board attorney Michael Inzelbuch, whose fees have raised concerns among state officials and local taxpayers.

For years, the district has operated under a model where it contracted with external legal professionals, such as Inzelbuch, on an hourly basis. However, this practice has come at a steep price. According to recent reports, the district has spent approximately $1 million annually on legal services, far exceeding the costs incurred by other school districts in New Jersey. Inzelbuch alone was paid over $800,000 during the 2024-2025 school year and nearly $7 million since 2017. These figures are significantly higher than the average salary for in-house education attorneys in the state, which ranges from $141,759 to $153,033 per year.

Cost Comparisons and Financial Concerns

To understand the scale of these expenses, it’s helpful to compare them with other districts. For example, Toms River Regional School District, which serves more than three times as many students as Lakewood, paid its board attorney and outside counsel a total of $341,608 in 2023-2024. Jackson Township Schools, with 7,500 students, spent just under $300,000 on legal services that same year. Even Newark Public Schools, the largest district in the state with 42,000 students, spent less than $391,000 on general counsel lawyers last year.

State Monitor Louise Davis, who recently denied the board’s third attempt to reappoint Inzelbuch, has emphasized the need for fiscal responsibility. In a letter to the board, she highlighted that several other school districts have successfully transitioned to in-house legal counsel, which allows them to manage outside law firms more effectively while reducing overall costs.

The RFP Process and Board Decisions

Davis also pointed out that the board had conducted a Request for Proposal (RFP) process to find a new board attorney. The process identified several qualified legal firms offering competitive rates. Among the six candidates, Marmero Law Firm submitted the lowest bid at $150 per hour. Despite this, the board chose Inzelbuch, who proposed a much higher rate of $350 per hour.

The decision to select Inzelbuch over the more cost-effective options has been criticized as inconsistent with industry standards. According to Davis, the board did not provide adequate justification for its choice, especially given that Inzelbuch ranked fourth in the RFP scoring rubric. He was also the most expensive option, yet the board proceeded with his reappointment without addressing the concerns raised by the review process.

The Debate Over Experience vs. Cost

Some board members, like Moshe Raitzik, argue that Inzelbuch’s experience with the district makes him a valuable asset. They claim that his familiarity with the district’s unique needs allows him to work more efficiently than other firms. However, critics maintain that the board should prioritize cost-effectiveness, particularly during a time of financial constraints.

The board’s decision has sparked a broader conversation about how school districts should balance the need for experienced legal counsel with the imperative to control spending. While some see value in having a long-standing relationship with an attorney, others believe that the current model is unsustainable and that transitioning to an in-house legal team would be a more prudent approach.

Future Implications

As the district moves forward, it will need to address these concerns and determine whether hiring a full-time attorney is the best path forward. State officials have indicated that they will continue to monitor the situation closely, ensuring that the district adheres to proper procurement practices and maintains transparency in its decision-making processes.

For now, the debate over legal costs and the role of outside attorneys continues to shape the future of the Lakewood School District. Whether the shift toward in-house representation will ultimately save money or create new challenges remains to be seen.