Toms River board rejects 2025–26 budget after proposed 12.9% tax increase

The Toms River Regional School District Board of Education on Monday rejected a proposed 2025–26 budget that district leaders said would raise the combined general fund and debt-service tax levy by 12.9%.

Superintendent Mr. Seda framed the vote as part of a longer fight over the state's S2 funding formula, saying the district has endured program cuts and steep adequacy shortfalls since the formula was implemented. "We are the lowest spending, most efficient school district in our [category]," he said, and argued the district has absorbed cumulative losses he described as the result of reallocation tied to S2.

Business administrator Mr. Doring outlined the revenue assumptions behind the proposal, saying the district included a $22.3 million state-advance/state-loan figure and had applied for tax-levy incentive aid that could provide up to $1 million. He said those assumptions would leave the district with a net proposed tax impact of 12.9% when combined with debt service.

The board opened the meeting for public comment on the budget. Bill Spadia, identifying himself as a parent and taxpayer, praised district staff and urged the board to press the state, saying, "They are literally robbing our suburbs and taking it to the cities." John Murion, who said he is on an exploratory committee to run for governor, called for audits of state spending and told the board to continue pushing Trenton on funding.

During public comment Crystal Whitaker asked about proceeds from the sale of property at 1144 and when district central offices would relocate; district staff responded the district expects to remain in the building through 2029 and that sale documents were signed and funds expected the following week. Jennifer How raised concerns about meeting start times and asked whether changes to special-education funding were advancing in Trenton; district staff said legislative proposals exist but that reimbursement mechanics and equalization aid remain unresolved.

Board member Kidney made the motion to adopt the budget; the roll-call vote recorded each named member voting no and the motion failed. Member Lamb explained her vote as a continued protest against how S2 has been applied and said she has repeatedly voted no since the formula's implementation.

With the resolution defeated, the board recorded that item eight did not pass. The meeting moved to a general comment period and then adjourned. The district did not adopt a budget at this meeting; next procedural steps were not specified during the session.