Board Games

Asbury Park Board of Education Meeting 6.26.25

The Asbury Park Board of Education held its latest meeting on June 26, 2025, at 6pm at the Bradley Elementary School. The main topic of the evening was the board’s decision on whether or not to ratify a new employment contract for Acting Superintendent Mark Gerbino for the upcoming 2025-2026 school year which expires on June 30th, 2025.

Gerbino served as Acting Superintendent during the 2024-2025 school year, replacing former Superintendent Dr. Rashawn Adams. His reappointment sparked tensions both within the board and among members of the public.

In attendance were: Board President Tracy Rodgers, Vice President Wendi Glassman, and members Stephanie Ackerman, Giuseppe Grillo, Barbara Lesinski, Dominic Latorraca, and Jessiemae Ricks. Members Kristen Clarke and Michael Penna joined virtually.

Before any vote took place, District Attorney Adam Weiss announced that five of the nine board members were conflicted and legally barred from voting on Gerbino’s contract. According to the attorney, a public meeting was not technically required for the decision, but was being held to ensure transparency.

Weiss came prepared with written resolutions outlining the conflicts – which the board members had not seen until Ms. Lesinski requested a copy mid-meeting, momentarily pausing the proceedings. That pause allowed time for principals from each school to recognize Students and Staff Members of the Month.

Weiss stated that Ackerman, Latorraca, Ricks, and Grillo are all involved in litigation filed by Mr. Gerbino which is currently pending in Monmouth County Superior Court. He also pointed out personal ties between board members and current district employees:

Board President Tracy Rodgers’ significant other holds a high-level position within the district.
Jessiemae Ricks’ niece, serves as a Human Resources Coordinator.

Ackerman pushed back, arguing that the conflicts were merely the attorney’s opinion, not legal fact. She emphasized that filing litigation shouldn’t disqualify a board member from voting.

Tensions rose further when Vice President Glassman clashed with Lesinski over whether the board had enough discussion leading up to the vote. Lesinski shared that there wasn’t much discussion if they were going to renew the contract or consider something else. Glassman replied that she specifically asked Leniski on two occasions not to discuss the situation. Lensiski believes that this should be a discussion between all board members, not just in fragments or behind closed doors.

Ackerman later criticized President Rodgers comments, which accused board members of “creating nonsense” instead of focusing on the students. She said, “We are in fact are trying to get transparency.” She cited the distribution of the resolutions during the meeting itself as an example of the lack of transparency.

During the public comment session various community members stepped forward to support Gerbino, citing his visibility and involvement in students’ lives. One speaker referenced this year’s high school graduation. She mentioned the hugs students gave to him when they walked across the stage. They said, “it shows to me that those kids actually pay attention to the fact that they see you in the building, at the football field, [and] at events.” She continued, “They know your face and all the years you’ve been here you actually showed those kids how much you really care about them.” She follows up with voicing how sad it is that the board members don’t interact with the students like the superintendent does. With a dysfunctional board she fears that the district will start to lose kids.

Another resident said Gerbino helped start a program that her son is the face of. She thanks him for all he’s done and that he’s helped her son move up to the next grade
.
On the flip side there were also a few community members that wanted to address problems that occur within the board. A first avenue resident questioned the lack of formal evaluation and wondered why a superintendent search had not been conducted.

Others raised financial concerns. Due to the fact that the district is still paying the superintendent that they fired along with the current one, the public believes that money should be going to the children.

Another speaker noted that the Department of Education’s Civil Rights division is facing cuts and asked how the board planned to respond.

One longtime district resident voiced concerns about issues she believes are being overlooked. She shared that the tax increase is a major complaint among residents, yet no one is holding Superintendent Gerbino accountable. She claimed that he hired multiple new staff members and approved salary increases, but these issues have gone unaddressed. As someone who’s been in the district for 30 years she said, “I can write a book, I know things and I have receipts.” She urged that the board stop fighting amongst themselves and do what’s right for the children.

After an executive session the board was ready to cast their votes. Gerbino’s contract was voted for renewal for the 2025-2026 school year.