Rockaway school budget presentation: proposed 2.466% tax levy increase, $53.6M levy and $2.4M capital reserve withdrawal

Meaghan Lam, Rockaway Township Public Schools business administrator, presented the district’s proposed 2025‑26 budget, telling the board the plan balances program needs, rising fixed costs and the 2% tax levy cap adjustments allowed through banked cap authority.

Why it matters: The proposed tax levy for 2025‑26 is $53,604,254, an increase of 2.466% over 2024‑25. Lam said the increase reflects higher insurance, utilities, contractual salary increases and other fixed costs while attempting to preserve programs and staffing. The district expects state aid of roughly $4.7 million and noted shifts in special education, transportation and security aid lines.

Key numbers and impacts: Lam listed line items and revenue sources: tax levy (approximately 84% of operating revenue), state aid (about 7.4% of operating revenue), a $1.5 million budgeted use of fund balance, an anticipated $2.4 million withdrawal from capital reserve to fund projects, and other revenue (tuition, transportation fees, federal grants). She said the average assessed home value in the township is $479,315; the estimated annual tax for that home under the proposed levy would be $4,465 per year, about $188 lower than the prior year’s comparable impact.

Capital priorities and projects: Lam outlined district capital work planned for the summer and next year, funded primarily with reserves rather than the operating levy: district‑wide flooring ($~$448,000), a district phone system replacement (initial cost $337,000, with estimated future annual savings), Copeland Middle School bleachers ($67,000), CMS and Stony Brook camera replacements ($191,620), a KDM window project estimated at $1.3 million, and playground upgrades (approx. $80,000). She said these projects were prioritized to preserve operations and address urgent needs.

Budget process and constraints: Lam emphasized 0‑based budgeting, the large share of personnel costs (70–80% of the budget), and the difficulty of holding to the 2% tax levy cap amid higher inflationary vendor increases. She explained the use of “banked cap” (carryforward tax levy authority) that allowed the district to propose above‑cap spending in this cycle, and cautioned that some banked cap amounts expire if not used.

Board and public reaction: Board members asked questions during the presentation; no adoption vote was recorded in this session. During public comment, resident Tucker Kelly raised concerns about cumulative tax increases and urged the district to pursue cost containment, grants and shared services with the township.

What’s next: The presentation will be posted to the district website with the full user‑friendly budget; the board will continue deliberations in upcoming meetings before final adoption under state timelines.