Haddon Township board debates 2%–6% tax scenarios as $1.1M aid loss, health-benefit spike widen gap

Haddon Township School District officials outlined a range of tentative budget options Tuesday as they face a multi‑year state aid decline and sharply higher employee health costs, prompting heated public comment and a divided board.

At a special meeting, administrators told the board the district has lost about $1,100,000 in state aid over the last three years and that projected health‑benefit increases could add roughly $8 million to the district’s annual benefits bill. The superintendent’s presentation offered four options to meet the county deadline: a 2% levy (largest program cuts), a 3.5%–4.5% mid‑tier package of targeted reductions and a 6% submission that would balance the budget without further staff reductions. “We cannot exceed 6%,” the presenter said during the overview.

Why it matters: The choice affects classroom staffing, extracurriculars and local tax bills. Administrators stressed that any number approved Tuesday would be tentative — the district must file a preliminary number with the county by the next business day but can amend it before final adoption, currently scheduled for May 7.

The presentation detailed program and personnel reductions already in place over recent years — district leaders listed eliminated positions from elementary teachers to counselors and clerical staff — and cited the state funding formula’s “adequacy” calculation and Camden County’s geographic cost adjustment (0.97) as drivers of the aid loss. Board members said they will pursue advocacy with state legislators; one board member said they had just testified before the Assembly Budget Committee and intend to work with Majority Leader Greenwald and a coalition of districts on formula reform.

Public commenters pressed the board on the size and fairness of any increase. “I am so against this increase,” said resident Denise Sanfilippo, describing personal hardship from a recent reassessment and rising household costs. Another resident, Gary McCarthy, urged more radical retrenchment: “Strip it down before we can build it back up,” he told the board. Speakers also proposed revenue ideas — including shared services with the township, limited events revenue and, during public comment, a suggested state‑level surtax on deliveries — and asked whether selling the board office would meaningfully reduce the local tax impact; administrators said sale proceeds would go to the general fund but offered no guarantee on timing or effect.

Board members debated the moral and practical tradeoffs. Some argued that a higher tentative levy would protect programs and staff, while others warned of disproportionate burdens on seniors and taxpayers without school‑age children. Administrators described three “tiers” of cuts tied to different levy levels: the least severe reductions (nonreplacement of some retirees and limited operational cuts) corresponded to higher levies, while deeper cuts to electives, non‑contracted stipends and substitute coverage would be required for lower levy submissions.

No final, roll‑call vote on a specific levy percentage was recorded during the meeting. The board recessed amid a heated exchange and later resumed; officials reiterated that the figure submitted to the county is provisional and that the board will continue working to identify additional cost savings. The board called a motion to adjourn that passed by voice vote.

Next steps: Administrators will submit a tentative budget number to the county to meet the filing deadline and return to the board for a structured meeting April 16 and a final budget adoption vote on May 7, when the public will have another opportunity to comment.