Hillsborough board approves higher local levy in 5–4 vote as residents urge alternatives

A divided Hillsborough Township Board of Education voted 5–4 on July 28 to raise the district’s local tax levy, a move board leaders said was necessary to prevent deep staffing cuts and to stabilize finances after repeated reductions in state aid.

Proponents, including the board president and the superintendent, said the increase — described at the meeting in different places as roughly $20 million in this year’s action and as part of a two‑year local levy rise the board characterized as about $26.6 million overall — gives the district multi‑year breathing room. The superintendent said the district also learned it had been awarded about $1.6 million by the state for capital items that had not been built into the tax levy, and he described the $1.6 million as separate from the local levy increase.

The vote followed a long round of public comment during which many residents called the increase excessive and urged alternative solutions. "This increase of $22 million is totally unreasonable and unsustainable," said Bala Mahadevan of Lawrence Court. Several speakers said their property tax bills rose 20–30% this year and urged either a referendum or deeper budget cuts. "Everybody who's on a fixed budget in this town just got beaten over the head by a hammer by five people," said another resident, referencing the five board votes in favor.

Other commenters defended maintaining resources for schools. "Keeping a strong school system in Hillsborough is the right thing to do," said Josh Gamy, who argued that good schools sustain property values and long‑term town health.

At the meeting, the superintendent and board members explained why the board adopted the levy increase. They said the district had faced repeated reductions under the state's funding formula (discussed at the meeting as the 'adequacy' or S2 formula) and that without additional local revenue the district would have faced layoffs and program cuts. Board members said they applied a mix of recurring spending and non‑recurring investments (the board said it aimed to place about two‑thirds of the additional dollars into non‑recurring items) to extend stability for several years.

The superintendent also told the meeting that the approximately $1.6 million state award addressed capital needs — such as the football field, track and bleacher repairs — that the district had not previously budgeted to pay for inside the operating levy. He said the state required that some of the larger increase be education‑focused for the district to qualify for certain aid.

Dissenting board members said the size and pace of the local levy increase risked alienating taxpayers and could imperil future referendums for capital projects. "We went above the cap two years in a row," one dissenting member said; others asked for stronger community input and for clearer, itemized budget breakdowns.

Board leaders said the district will hold community engagement nights in the fall to explain budget choices and to answer questions. The board also encouraged residents to sign up for the district’s weekly email newsletter to receive links to budget presentations and prior community engagement meetings.

Votes at a glance

- Education consent package (travel, grants, staffing for summer programs, curriculum revisions and related education motions): Approved in roll call (majority yes; one member recorded a no on a specific travel item). (See actions list.) - Human resources package (resignations, appointments, creation of two instruction assistant positions, creation of a girls head wrestling coach stipend, suspension of an employee): Approved on roll call. Details on individual personnel were listed on the agenda. (See actions list.) - Operations package (monthly bills, contracts, bid threshold change, A&E work for full‑day kindergarten site/bathroom reviews, vendor agreements, transportation contracts): Approved on roll call after clarifications. (See actions list.) - Policy 511 (eligibility of resident/nonresident students) — second reading: Approved on roll call.

What happens next

Board members said they will publish further budget detail at upcoming community engagement nights and via the district’s email newsletter. Any implementation of capital work funded by the state award will require separate board action. The board adjourned after member comments and the meeting of July 28 concluded with a pledge to continue community outreach.