LACEY – Voters will decide this fall whether to approve a nearly $29 million bond referendum for repairs and upgrades in the Lacey Township School District.
The measure, authorized by a unanimous vote of the Board of Education at its July 17 meeting, will appear on the November 4 general election ballot. If approved, it would allow the district to borrow $28,873,500 to fund roof replacements and HVAC improvements at six schools.
The breakdown of projects includes $14.1 million for Lacey Township High School, $3.7 million for the middle school, $5.5 million for Mill Pond Elementary, $2.1 million for Cedar Creek Elementary, $2.15 million for Forked River Elementary, and $1.3 million for Lanoka Harbor Elementary. Inspectors determined Lanoka Harbor’s roof does not yet need replacement, so only HVAC systems would be addressed there.
According to the board, the New Jersey Department of Education has approved the full project cost as eligible for state aid. The state would contribute 40 percent of the annual debt service.
Board members maintain that the work is not optional. Some school roofs are actively leaking, with buckets already used to catch water in hallways and classrooms. Heating and air conditioning units are nearing the end of their life cycles, leaving concerns about system breakdowns in the heat of summer or the cold of winter.
“Our roofs are still leaking, and we’re just trying to keep the water from penetrating our buildings,” Board member Scott Peters said. He added that delaying the projects would likely lead to costlier emergency repairs that would fall entirely on local taxpayers without the benefit of state reimbursement.
District leaders have emphasized that the referendum will not raise taxes. Because existing debt is set to expire, the bonds can be issued in a way that keeps the overall debt service stable. Officials have even suggested that residents could see a slight reduction, with Peters saying taxpayers “actually get back about four dollars” once refinancing is accounted for. For a community that has endured back-to-back tax increases of nearly 20 percent over the past two years, that reassurance is a central part of the board’s case.
Still, skepticism runs deep. Residents like Richard Bidnick of Lacey Citizens for Responsible Government say trust has been eroded beyond repair. At the July board meeting, Bidnick reminded the board that families are already struggling under the weight of high taxes and insisted they have resulted in declining property values. He also said the district has both an administration and board problem.
“There’s five people on this board who we can blame for all of this,” insisted Bidnick. “They didn’t have to increase the taxes the way they did. This was a decision that was made by five people on this board, and they are responsible for that, and there’s no other answers about it. They didn’t want to even listen to anything that we the public have to say.”
Lacey’s financial troubles have been building for years. Under the state’s S-2 funding formula, the district has lost millions in aid, forcing program cuts and staff reductions. Officials have pointed to the funding policies of Governor Phil Muprhy as the reason it can’t come up with an acceptable budget.
The district avoided a state takeover in 2024 when its first proposed budget failed to pass. Only after a second attempt, which required a 9.54 percent tax levy increase, did the board manage to keep the district afloat.
Bidnick also warned that taxpayers remember the board’s last attempt at a referendum, when voters rejected a broader package of projects criticized as excessive and poorly timed. “If this had gone to a referendum before, it would have been voted down just like the last time,” he told school board members.
The differences between that failed referendum and this year’s proposal are significant. Last year’s ballot questions came in three parts. They were larger in scope and cost, combining roof and HVAC repairs with additional projects such as security upgrades, building expansions, and a turf field. Voters soundly rejected the measures, leaving critical repairs unresolved.
The current referendum appears to have been deliberately scaled back to avoid those pitfalls. It focuses exclusively on the most pressing issues, specifically roofs and HVAC systems. Board members said approval of the ballot question is necessary to secure the 40 percent contribution from the state. And, because older debt is being retired, district leaders say the work can be financed without adding to residents’ tax burden.
School officials have argued that rejecting the proposal will not make the problems disappear. Instead, roofs will continue to leak, climate systems will continue to break down, and the costs of patchwork fixes will rise.
The decision will ultimately rest with the voters on November 4. If the referendum passes, work will proceed under the direction of Settembrino Architects, with the state paying nearly half the debt service.
