Seastreak Ferry Service to Point Pleasant Beach Nixed After Council Vote

The Seastreak ferry arrives in Point Pleasant Beach for the first time, June 4, 2026. (Credit: Seastreak)

A raucous borough council meeting in Point Pleasant Beach Tuesday night led to a vote that ultimately caused Seastreak to cancel plans for a ferry service between the Shore and New York City.

The meeting, which spanned more than four hours, included heated discussions between those in favor of the service – which would have run from Manhattan’s finance district to a dock on Inlet Drive near the U.S. Coast Guard station – that had garnered significant media attention when it was announced last month. In a 3-2 vote, the council voted down an ordinance that would have created a licensing framework for ferry services and enabled Seastreak to operate trips on nine summer weekends this year as part of a pilot program. Some residents said they opposed the service because it could bring extra traffic to Inlet Drive, however others lambasted the service because they objected to an influx of additional tourists in the resort community.

In response, Seastreak issued a statement Wednesday saying it would abandon its plans for a route to Point Pleasant Beach, which was set to begin this Friday, June 19.

---

Get Daily Island News Updates Your email address:* Please enter all required fields Correct invalid entries

“There’s no free trial – there’s no trial period,” said Councilman John Dixon, who opposed the ordinance. “If you want to have a ferry in this town, you have to follow the process and follow the rules, end of story.”

The Seastreak ferry arrives in Point Pleasant Beach for the first time, June 4, 2026. (Credit: Seastreak)

Before even voting on the ordinance, which was also subject to a public hearing, the governing body – in the same 3-2 configuration – voted to remove the portion that would allow for a trial period and impose on Seastreak the obligation to go before the borough’s zoning board, which normally includes months of preparation and the hiring of attorneys, engineers, consults and other experts. That move, in and of itself, largely precluded the operation of the ferry in the immediate future. After this change, discussion shifted to the licensing system in general, and the heated discussion began.

“I don’t understand why we’re so excited about dumping 400 or 500 extra people here on the busiest weekends of the year when we already have too many people in this town,” said resident Dan Friendly. “What is the town getting out of it? Five-hundred more people when there are already too many people here? They’re not paying parking fees, so we’re not getting parking revenue from them, the motels are already 100 percent full so you’re not getting any hotel tax revenue, so what are we getting out of this?”

Mayor Doug Vitale signaled support for the service, which has garnered significant positive media attention in recent weeks.

“If 500 people come, that’s great for the town, but I don’t even think we’re going to get that,” he said, brushing away concerns of traffic jams on Inlet Drive – a one-way road that snakes around the block south of Manasquan Inlet.

Vitale said an initial plan called for police to direct traffic for the short amount of time the ferry would be dropping off or boarding, and rideshare vehicles could pick up passengers at the Little Silver Lake parking lot. He said the lack of vehicles for people coming into town would benefit traffic rather than have a deleterious affect on it.

“They liked the idea because we’re bringing in people without cars, especially an upwardly-mobile young professional demographic,” said Councilwoman Kitty Stillufsen, referencing the view of firefighters in town with whom she spoke.

The Seastreak ferry arrives in Point Pleasant Beach for the first time, June 4, 2026. (Credit: Seastreak)

Some residents, however, vehemently disagreed, raising concerns that ranged from the practical to the bizarre. Several residents noted concerns of drivers violating the one-way direction of traffic on Inlet Drive – a long-running issue – and bottlenecks near Captain Bill’s, which is located near the goose-neck turn in Inlet Drive located after the road runs along the waterway but before it reaches the Red’s Lobster Dock restaurant and the Coast Guard station. Others feared the fact that the ferry could, in theory, carry 500 passengers each way since it has the physical capacity to do so, however it was estimated that about 100 passengers would actually be on board the service, which was to unload and department in a 15-minute window. Another resident mused that alcohol sales on the ferry could lead some passengers to trip when departing the vessel.

Not all residents who spoke were against the service.

“It’s a dock,” said Darryl Monticello. “What do docks do? It lets people on and lets people off – that’s a dock.”

He said the borough already has deep-sea fishing boats that carry hundreds of passengers to fishing grounds each day, as well as water taxis that bring tourists to bars and restaurants.

“We have boats coming into our ports constantly letting people on and off,” he said. “We go from 5,000 people to 100,000 people [in town during the summer]. You think 100 people is going to make a difference? Because you don’t like it doesn’t mean it’s not a permitted use to allow people to go on and off a dock.”

Officials, however, stuck to their belief that because the borough code is currently silent on ferry services, they are – by default – not permitted anywhere in town and should seek formal hearing before the planning or zoning boards, as well as undergo analysis by borough professionals.

“This is ridiculous,” said Dixon, lamenting the fact that a special council meeting on the ferry ordinance cost taxpayers $2,370 to pay the hourly rates of professionals. “This is supposed to go for a use variance – you’re bypassing that. If you allow the ferry to be a use in that zone – and I’m not saying it shouldn’t be in the future – but if you bypass that now and jump ahead … you’re cutting out a whole section of our safety zone to make sure it’s on the up-and-up.”

“You can’t just open up a business any way you want to do it,” he added.

Monticello had a different take: “The only people who are going to make out on this are the professionals,” he said, in reference to the small army of attorneys, engineers, architects, traffic consults and marine industry consultants who would be hired to provide testimony on behalf of the ferry operator at a zoning board hearing.

The argument didn’t sway Councilman Andy Cortes.

“I’m not saying the boat’s a bad idea, they just have to go through a process,” he said. “If it’s not defined in our ordinance, it’s nor permitted.”

Cortes pushed back on claims by some that Point Pleasant Beach was a “tourist community,” stating, “We are a residential community that’s a tourist destination.”

Ultimately, council members Dixon, Cortes and Stillufsen represented the three votes which turned down the licensing ordinance and pilot program, a move that Vitale, the mayor, labeled “squandering an opportunity.” Ramos and Councilwoman Caryn Burns voted in favor of the ordinance; the mayor does not get a vote under Point Pleasant Beach’s system of government.

While the legal argument for whether Seastreak would actually require permission from the local municipal government to utilize a private dock in town to embark and disembark passengers was unclear, the company said in a statement issued Wednesday that it would simply not move forward with the service.

“To get to this point after the level of engagement we’ve had is extremely frustrating and disappointing” said company president James D. Barker. “We were confident that we had a path to responsibly test this service. The whole purpose of the pilot was to determine whether service was logistically and economically viable before making larger investments and commitments. Without the ability to test the concept on a limited basis as we proposed, it becomes very difficult to move forward.”