To the Editor,
New Jersey law allows school boards to use public funds to provide factual information about a bond referendum, but not to advocate for one side. The New Jersey Supreme Court made this clear in Citizens v. Parsippany-Troy Hills (1953), stating that tax dollars cannot be used to persuade voters, only to present facts. Later cases, such as Enterline v. Hillsborough (1996), reaffirmed this principle: even subtle language implying “vote yes” is improper if paid for with taxpayer money.
That is why the recent glossy mailer from the Hopewell Valley Regional School District raises concerns. It repeatedly highlights “$20.2M in State Aid” and promotes referendum projects with language like “Envisioning Our Future,” “standout schools that benefit students,” and “Question 2 is the quickest, most certain path to expand 2 schools.” These are not neutral facts. They are persuasive arguments.
If public funds paid for the design, printing, and mailing of this flyer, then taxpayer dollars were used not to educate but to advocate. That crosses the legal line set by our courts. Balanced, factual materials are appropriate. Campaign-style mailers are not.
Our community deserves transparency, fairness, and respect for both sides of the referendum debate.
Respectfully,
Daniel Opdyke
Hopewell, NJ
