Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Board Governance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board accepts Pascarella resignation amid ethics allegation; approves outside counsel for lawsuit at capped rate
Summary
The Toms River Regional School District board accepted the resignation of board member Pa Pascarella effective Feb. 18, 2026, after a member alleged she omitted nearly $300,000 on a financial disclosure. The board also authorized outside counsel for pending litigation at a blended rate not to exceed $250 per hour; a member recused from that vote.
The Toms River Regional School District Board of Education voted to accept the resignation of board member Pa Pascarella effective Feb. 18, 2026, and later authorized outside counsel for pending litigation in a separate roll-call vote.
Board business opened with annual ethics training and moved through routine approvals before the resignation was presented. During discussion leading up to the vote, board member Lamb said Pascarella “knowingly lied on her personal financial disclosure by intentionally omitting almost $300,000 in income paid to her family by the Township of Toms River,” and characterized the member’s recent conduct and absences as grounds for removal. The board voted to accept the resignation on roll call.
The board also added and approved agenda item 19A to retain outside counsel in the case styled Matarazzo v. Toms River Regional Board of Education (OCNL29126). The contract awarded professional services to Kisa Kasa Firm PC to represent and defend the board at a blended hourly rate not to exceed $250, pursuant to applicable statute. A board member announced a recusal from that vote; the motion passed by roll call.
Attorney William Burns led the meeting’s annual ethics presentation beforehand, citing statutory provisions and conflict-of-interest rules that govern board conduct and financial disclosures. Burns reviewed the School Ethics Act and related provisions (described in meeting materials) and said the training’s purpose is “to ensure and preserve public confidence” in board governance.
The legal-retention vote followed comments noting that existing district counsel firms had conflicts that precluded representation in the Matarazzo matter; the board recorded the award of a professional-services contract specifically for that litigation. When a resident later asked during public comment whether the board had approved counsel at $250 per hour, officials confirmed the retention was not to exceed that blended rate.
What’s next: the resignation creates an open seat on the board and the district will follow its procedures to fill it. The retained firm will be the board’s counsel in the referenced litigation; no further details about the scope or any retainer amount beyond the stated blended hourly cap were provided at the meeting.
Provenance: The resignation discussion and vote were introduced during the business portion of the meeting (topic introduction in the meeting timeline) and concluded with the roll-call acceptance recorded on the same agenda; the outside-counsel award was added as agenda item 19A and passed by roll call. Two related public-comment queries later asked about the law-firm rate and the district confirmed the $250-per-hour cap.
