Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Regionalization topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Seaside Heights board formally rejects regionalization study

Seaside Heights Board of Education · March 23, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Seaside Heights Board of Education voted to reject a December 9, 2025 regionalization and shared-services feasibility study, with board president Dr. Marko saying the proposed full consolidation would reduce local control and likely increase property taxes.

Dr. Marko, board president, told the March 23 meeting that the Seaside Heights Board of Education will not support a broad regionalization of five school districts and moved to reject the December 9, 2025 Regionalization and Shared Services Feasibility Study.

“I went into it with an open mind,” Dr. Marko said, “but the consultants ... pre-determined in the beginning that they wanted a full regionalization of all five districts,” and “this board will not be voting for any such regionalization effort.” He said a large consolidation could raise Seaside Heights property taxes and dilute the district’s representation on a larger board.

The resolution the board adopted finds that the Study’s consolidation proposals do not show sufficient educational, fiscal, operational, or governance benefits to justify altering the current structure of the Seaside Heights School District. The resolution directs the superintendent to communicate the board’s decision to appropriate government entities, participating districts, consultants and stakeholders.

Board members voted on recorded motions during the meeting. A motion to approve items that included the resolution carried on roll call with Ms. Franciosi, Ms. Richardson and Dr. Marko voting yes. The resolution’s text cites concerns about local control, tax impacts and potential governance consequences if consolidation proceeded.

The Study was described in the meeting as a consultant report tied to a state grant and involving Rowan University contractors; the board said it had not funded the study and characterized its own role as having monitored the work rather than initiated it.

Next steps identified by the board are administrative: the superintendent was directed to notify stakeholders and government entities of the board’s formal rejection. The board did not schedule additional votes on regionalization at the March 23 meeting.