North Hunterdon-Voorhees board adopts $76.6 million 2025–26 budget after contentious debate over safety and long-term financing

The North Hunterdon-Voorhees Regional High School District Board of Education approved the district’s 2025–26 spending plan on April 29, voting to set the tax levy at a 2.67 percent increase over the prior year. The resolution adopting the budget was carried after a roll-call vote following a public hearing that drew several dozen speakers and more than an hour of board discussion.

The budget presentation by district leaders described a roughly $76.6 million operating requirement and noted salaries and benefits account for the largest share of costs. Interim business administrator Jeff Piker said the preliminary budget assumed a $56 million local tax levy and about $4.3 million in state aid for 2025–26. “This is the March 18 preliminary budget that was approved at 2.67% increase over the prior year,” Piker told the board during the hearing.

The board’s majority framed the increase as fiscal prudence to preserve programing, staff and contingency dollars after years of declining state aid and a drop in enrollment that the presentation showed has reduced district revenue flexibility. “If you cut out that difference this year … that’s 4 or 5 employees. But more importantly, let’s talk about next year,” resident John Michione told the board during public comment, urging the board to avoid setting up steeper cuts in future years.

Public comment at the hearing was overwhelmingly in support of the proposed levy. Franklin Township resident Yvonne Shepherd told the board, “I totally approve and support the budget that requires 2.67% of the municipal tax burden,” citing rising health-care costs and a desire to preserve staff and programs. Other speakers, including Union Township resident Nicholas Lavelle and Franklin Township resident Sandra Marzo, urged approval on similar grounds, emphasizing small per-household impacts and the district’s need to cover rising contractual costs and insurance premiums.

Board members debated whether the district could find deeper, nonclassroom savings to hold the levy to 2.00 percent. Several board members said administration had already identified line-item reductions to reach the 2.67 percent figure without cutting teachers or current student programming, but some trustees urged more aggressive long-term planning. Trustee Brandon (board member) said he supported the 2.67 percent increase while pushing for advocacy and structural solutions to state funding constraints; Trustee Lorty (board member) said he believed additional nonclassroom reductions were still possible and urged concentrated, immediate action to reduce the cost curve while protecting the classroom.

School security and a contracted school resource officer (SRO) also surfaced as a significant point of board and public concern during budget debate. Trustees discussed the difference between Class III security officers and an SRO supplied by a municipal police department; chief among the issues were the SRO contract’s costs and the benefits the district receives beyond basic on-site safety. Board members said they will refer contract structure and scope to a committee for further review before the next school year; administration has agreed the current agreement will be revisited and the district will seek clarification about which duties and hours are performed under the SRO arrangement.

The board’s final roll call produced an approval of the budget (motion carried). The district president called for the vote after extended discussion; the meeting record shows a roll-call vote was recorded before the chair announced the motion carried.

The superintendent and business office stressed the district will continue to scrutinize expenditures and present additional options to the board for next year’s planning. Superintendent (presenter) said the district is pursuing options such as applying for state regionalization/efficiency study grants and looking at longer-term capital planning to avoid sudden fiscal shocks in future budgets.

Votes at a glance - Resolution to adopt the 2025–26 budget (resolution as read at the public hearing): approved (motion carries after roll-call vote). The board set the 2025–26 tax levy at a 2.67% increase; the district presented a total operating requirement of about $76.6 million and state aid of roughly $4.3 million. The preliminary presentation showed the local tax levy share at about $56 million. - SRO contract for the current term (agenda item 15.1): approved by the board in order to close the year’s contract period; trustees said the district will reexamine contract terms and benefits before the next school year. - Personnel resolutions including agenda items 21.1 and 21.2: approved by the board following executive session (individual roll-call details recorded in the minutes).

What this means for taxpayers and programs - Administration said the 2.67 percent levy preserves staff, electives, athletics and special-education supports while maintaining contingency funds to absorb unexpected costs. The budget slides shown to the public included per-municipality impacts (for example, a cited illustrative figure showed a Bethlehem Township homeowner’s share increasing by about $21.77 annually for the levy change). - Trustees and administration agreed to continue line-by-line review and to bring forward possible longer-term structural options for reducing pressure on taxpayers and protecting classroom services.

The board closed the public hearing portion of the meeting by adopting the budget and moved on to other business. The district will submit its final certified budget documents to the county office by the state deadlines.