Ocean Township board directs staff to draft change raising for‑profit facility rental rates to peer average

The Township of Ocean School District Board of Education gave administration direction to draft a policy change raising the district’s for‑profit facility rental fees to the average charged by comparable districts and return that proposal for formal consideration at the board’s next meeting.

Business administrator Mister Hastings presented a benchmarking review of the district’s “use of facilities” policy and regulation, saying the administration compared Ocean Township with five nearby districts (Deal, Freehold Township, Middletown, Neptune and Shore Regional). “We went and worked with, 6 districts, including our own,” Hastings said during his presentation while reviewing fee tables and three years of rental revenue.

Hastings told the board the district’s gross facility rental revenue totaled just under $62,000 in 2023, about $45,000 in 2024 and $43,000 so far in 2025 through May. He said the year‑to‑year variation was largely driven by the presence in 2023 of two higher‑paying for‑profit users that did not return in later years (one listed as Camp Max, the other as PDIQ).

The board discussed several options: a simple one‑time increase to match the peer average, a permanent annual adjustment tied to the consumer price index (CPI) to prevent future erosion from inflation, and a usage‑based sliding scale (seasonal or per‑season pricing rather than per‑event fees). Board members emphasized balancing revenue goals with access for local youth and nonprofit groups. “These are local community groups that are utilizing our facilities, and we want to keep in mind that they’re generating their funds based on fees to parents,” Hastings said in response to questions about impacts on local teams.

Board members reached a straw‑poll consensus in favor of asking the administration to move only the for‑profit fee schedule to the peer average presented, with the administration rounding rates to the nearest $10 when drafting the policy change. The board president conducted the poll and said a majority supported that limited change; the president asked administration to return the drafted policy for the board’s first meeting next month for formal consideration. The board did not take a formal roll‑call vote on the policy change at this meeting.

Board members did not reach a majority in favor of raising nonprofit or seasonal (per‑season) fees at this time. Several members said the seasonal fee structure and the sliding‑scale idea require additional data (peer seasonal fees, typical seasonal date counts) and staff time to administer. One board member observed that some districts charge season fees while others charge per‑event rates, making direct comparisons imperfect.

Hastings and the board discussed sample fee comparisons presented: for example, the district’s nonprofit gym fee (listed in the handout as about $180) compared with a peer average of $275; a nonprofit cafeteria fee of $125 versus an average of $188; and a nonprofit auditorium fee shown at $325 compared with a nonprofit peer average of $125. On the for‑profit side, one illustration showed Ocean Township at $540 versus a peer average of $559. Hastings also noted a district practice of assessing a seasonal fee (for groups that apply for repeated dates) and that past practice and prior board direction influence current rates; he said the regulation on file was last updated in March 2020.

The board discussed operational issues raised by the sliding‑scale idea, including staff workload if the business office must track exact usage counts, and whether applicants would submit full‑season applications (which board members suggested as a way to limit administrative burden). Several board members said any additional revenue would likely be reinvested in facility maintenance and upkeep.

Public comment on the agenda included praise from one resident for moving quickly to adjust fees and a request that the administration share the benchmarking spreadsheet with the public. The board president said administration will prepare and present the drafted policy change increasing only for‑profit rates to the peer average (rounded to the nearest $10) at the next meeting; any further changes to nonprofit or seasonal fees will be discussed later and require additional data.

Clarifying details from the presentation: the district reported annual facility rental revenue near $62,000 in 2023, $45,000 in 2024 and $43,000 in 2025 (through May); the administration counted roughly 25–30 distinct applicant groups over the three‑year period; two for‑profit users accounted for about a $15,000 difference between 2023 and later years (Camp Max ~$8,600 and PDIQ ~$6,000, per the presentation). The administration compared the district with Deal, Freehold Township, Middletown, Neptune and Shore Regional for the benchmarking figures.

The next step recorded in this meeting was administrative direction: to draft an amendment raising for‑profit facility rental fees to the peer average shown in the handout, round figures to the nearest $10, and place the proposed policy change on the board’s agenda for the board’s next meeting for formal first reading and eventual adoption if the board votes to do so.