Asbury Park district weighs property sales and public-private partnerships to close multimillion-dollar gap

Asbury Park Superintendent Michael Gerbino said the district is "facing a deficit" and presented multiple options to close a multimillion-dollar gap, including selling buildings, consolidating operations and pursuing public-private partnerships.

Why it matters: The board is weighing capital and operating choices that could affect school facilities, staff deployment and the local tax levy. At the meeting the board voted to set minimum bid prices for two district properties and to submit a revised (tentative) budget package to the county, steps the administration said are needed while longer-term revenue options are developed.

Gerbino told the board the district has reorganized operations to save money (moving central office functions, consolidating early‑grade classrooms and expanding in‑district special‑education placements). He said the district has realized direct savings and new revenue from expanded ERI placements — "a net total savings earned income of $1,070,000," he said — and that the University of Florida Literacy Institute (UFLI) is being used districtwide and drawing positive attention from the state Department of Education.

But the administration said those gains are not enough to erase a larger structural shortfall. Gerbino laid out building‑by‑building options: several properties (including Thurgood Marshall, Barack Obama and the maintenance shop) are under active review as potential sources of revenue. He gave renovation cost estimates and utility projections for bringing some buildings back into use: "In order to get Thurgood Marshall up and running again for next year, we need to put $2,500,000 into the building itself," he said; he described a lower projected renovation cost for the Barack Obama building, about $1,300,000, and higher operating‑cost projections for third and Marshall if fully reopened.

Gerbino described a possible long‑term approach to keep ownership while monetizing assets: a public‑private partnership (P3). He noted the state law authorizing such arrangements and said a P3 could produce ongoing revenue without permanently relinquishing district land: "the public private partnership will be looked to utilize...the property’s back in Asbury Park’s hand in 30 years if that's what you choose to do," he said.

State monitor David Schafer walked the board through why the district’s projected shortfall grew in recent budget drafts and how the county and state are treating certain line items. Schafer explained that technical corrections (updates to personnel cost reports, charter school tuition adjustments, and a corrected health‑insurance calculation) increased the projected deficit in the county model. He said the county suggested inserting placeholder sale proceeds to produce a tentative balanced budget while the district pursues asset‑sale or revenue options. "You can sell the Marshall School for $12,500,000 — that's a number. I'm not saying you're going to do it, but the county said put a placeholder in there," Schafer told the board.

Schafer also emphasized limits and cautions: the draft sent to the county is tentative, the monitor said, and the county will likely recommend additional changes; he added, "this budget does not include laying off teachers, does not include privatizing custodians, does not include privatizing security..." and said the draft is intended to keep options open while the district finalizes plans.

Board action and next steps: The board approved motions to set reserve (minimum) sale prices and to submit a budget addendum to the county for review. By roll call the board set a minimum bid of $3,300,000 for the maintenance building at 916–920 Second Avenue (motion approved unanimously), and set a minimum bid of $650,000 for the Dorothy McNish Parent Center at 300 Prospect Avenue (motion approved unanimously). The board then voted to submit the monitor’s proposed budget addendum as a tentative budget to the county; the addendum passed on a 4–5 vote (Yes: Miss Clark, Mr. Grillo, Miss Glassman, Mr. Rogers; No: Miss Ackerman, Mr. LaRocca, Miss Lesinski, Dr. Pena, Miss Ricks). The board and administration agreed to continue parallel tracks: (1) prepare sale specifications and reserve prices, and (2) finalize a facilities/maintenance relocation plan so proceeds, if realized, can be applied appropriately.

Questions from board members and public commenters focused on timing, deed restrictions and the county’s treatment of anticipated sale proceeds. Multiple board members asked whether a deed restriction (for example, to prevent a future purchaser from using a site as a charter school) could be written into a sale; district counsel said a restriction is legally possible if an entering buyer agrees. Gerbino and his team said they will begin formal discussions with the city about shared‑facility options for maintenance shops and that the administration will provide cost estimates and site plans before any property is advertised for sale.

Ending: The administration said it will bring more detailed financial reports and options to the finance and buildings & grounds committees and that the board will hold further public discussion before finalizing a budget at the public hearing. The monitor warned the county will review the tentative budget and may require additional changes; the board scheduled follow‑up meetings and a public hearing on the proposed budget in coming weeks.