Hillsborough board debates 0% vs. 2% tax levy and whether to use $6.7M health‑care waiver

The Hillsborough Township Board of Education spent the largest portion of its Feb. 26 meeting debating how to approach next year’s school tax levy, with members weighing a conservative 2% increase against a no‑increase option and scrutiny of a possible health‑care waiver that would add substantial taxing authority.

Superintendent Mr. Volpe told the board the district is drafting a budget at a 2% levy baseline and that the board has statutory ability to pursue a health‑care waiver to recoup costs above that baseline. Mr. Volpe said the current estimate for additional taxing authority tied to the waiver is about $6.7 million; he added that his recommendation was not to exercise that full waiver now.

“Two percent on the current tax levy is … almost $2.9 million,” Mr. Volpe said. He explained that the state sets a starting percentage (typically 2%) and that the waiver permits the district to raise taxes beyond that cap to cover health‑insurance cost increases. Board members were told recent broker estimates for health‑insurance increases moved from roughly 19% to approximately 28% in the past day, though administration emphasized the figure was not final.

Board members expressed sharply different priorities. Several directors, including Miss Jackson and Mr. Hill, said they could not support further increases given the financial strain on some households and recent large tax adjustments. “I can’t support any increase,” Miss Jackson said, noting that prior increases were not “small.” By contrast, Mr. Marini and Miss Lanie Beater argued a modest 2% provides budgetary stability and avoids larger shocks later. “I think the best thing is stability,” Mr. Marini said, arguing that steady increases reduce long‑term volatility.

Members also pressed for clarity on how a health‑care waiver would function in practice. Mr. Volpe and other administrators explained that any unused portion of waiver authority can be “banked” for up to three years, allowing a future board to levy that authority without an additional voter approval. That mechanism heightened concern among members who worry about leaving sizeable taxing power available to future boards without additional checks.

Several board members urged a cautious approach: review committee work over the coming months, wait for final state aid numbers and the state commissioner’s guidance on funding formulas, and craft parameters to guide if and when the waiver would be pursued. Mr. Volpe said administration will produce a tentative budget and return to the board for detailed review, at which point members can examine line items and question assumptions.

Next steps: administration will draft a tentative budget based on current guidance and provide committee meetings and line‑by‑line review opportunities for board members before any final levy or waiver decision is adopted.