The Hopewell Valley Regional Board of Education approved a $105.7 million tentative budget Monday night for the 2025–2026 school year, including a 4.1% tax levy increase that board members say is necessary to maintain high-quality programming while addressing rising costs and funding limitations.
Under the proposal, the average homeowner would see a property tax increase ranging from $281 to $343, depending on the municipality:
- Hopewell Borough: $281 increase
- Hopewell Township: $295 increase
- Pennington Borough: $343 increase
The general fund tax levy is increasing by 4.3%, with an overall tax levy increase of 4.1%, reflecting a balance between necessary expenditures and a slight reduction in debt service costs.
“This has been one of the toughest budget seasons we’ve had,” Superintendent Dr. Rosetta Treece said. “We’ve made strategic decisions to limit the impact on students and preserve the core of what makes this district strong.”
A District Heavily Reliant on Local Taxes
The budget highlights the district’s dependence on local funding, which makes up 92% of its revenue. This includes:
- 87% from property taxes
- 2% from tuition, transportation, and facility use fees
- 3% from the use of surplus funds
Meanwhile, state funding accounts for just 7% and federal funding only 1%, placing a greater burden on local taxpayers to cover rising costs.
Board member Dr. Alex Reznik acknowledged the financial impact of the tax increase but said deeper cuts would have compromised the district’s reputation for strong academics.
“We could have gone for a lower tax rate increase, but the cuts would have had to be quite a bit deeper,” Reznik said. “I want to recognize that in this current situation this is a painful increase to the taxpayers of the district, but I think it’s important both for the district and ultimately for the property values of everybody to maintain the quality education that we have here.”
Where the Money Goes
The largest portion of the budget includes staff benefits, special education, operations, transportation salaries and benefits. Those categories total almost 77% of the total budget.
- General Education: $39.6 million or 37.5%
- Special Education: $20.7 million or 19.7%
- Staff Benefits: $21.9 million or 20.7%
- Operations & Maintenance: $7.6 million or 7.3%
- Transportation: $6.5 million or 6.2%
District officials said rising inflation, enrollment growth, and mandatory technology upgrades have driven up costs across several areas, including curriculum, transportation, insurance, and staffing.
Budget Cuts and New Fees to Offset Rising Costs
In an effort to limit deeper reductions in staff and programs, the district is implementing several cost-saving measures and fee increases:
- Reinstating athletic and co-curricular participation fees, with discounts for multiple children or activities
- Charging the full cost for courtesy busing, estimated at $1,000 per student
- Increasing class sizes across general education classrooms
- Eliminating the high school’s auto shop program, (there are no certified instructors)
- Reducing district-funded field trips
- Consolidating or eliminating non-instructional staff positions
Public Concerns and Board Response
During public comment, some residents questioned the impact of budget reductions.
Heather Irish Mott spoke about the elimination of the auto shop program, saying it had provided valuable life skills to her son. “That is a life skill,” she said. “And I really believe that’s something that should be preserved.”
District officials explained that the program could not continue due to a statewide shortage of certified auto shop teachers, mirroring similar challenges in other vocational programs.
Others asked about how the district calculates eligibility for courtesy busing fees. Officials clarified that distances are measured along walking routes along roads, not in a straight line. Busing must be provided if there are no sidewalks.
Finance Committee Chair Mark Peters emphasized that he was confident the budget reflected the board’s directive to “minimize disruption and maximize what we’ve always done,” despite economic restraints.
“Add those numbers up — that’s teachers,” Peters said. “If we’re going to continue to expect the type of programming and the type of great education we get… we’re going to pay some more money.”
He emphasized that the proposed fee increases and staffing adjustments were necessary trade-offs to preserve teaching positions and instructional quality. “Add those numbers up — that’s teachers. Those are teachers that we get to keep here,” he said.
Peters pointed to state-imposed funding limitations as a key challenge, describing the situation as part of a broader “Trenton problem.”
“This is not a Hopewell problem,” he said. “We are limited by what the state enables us to do or not do.”
He also expressed his continued trust in the district’s leadership team, including the superintendent and business administrator, praising their expertise and commitment.
“They know more than I do when it comes to their specialty,” he said. “They are doing a tremendous job with trying to meet what we asked them to do.”
While acknowledging that no one likes tax increases, Peters said the board’s responsibility is to maintain the district’s high standards — even when that requires difficult decisions.
“We have a special community and a special school district,” he said. “And that sometimes means we have to do these give and takes.”
Board member John Slotman cast the sole “no” vote, saying he wasn’t yet fully comfortable with the plan but remained open to further discussions before the final adoption in April.
Next Steps
The tentative budget now moves to the county superintendent for review. A final public hearing and vote are scheduled for April 28. The meeting will be at Hopewell Elementary school at 6:30 p.m. The district will hold a tour of the school at 5:30 p.m. to let people see areas of the school that need to be repaired as part of a proposed referendum.
An Aging Stony Brook Elementary
As part of the possible referendum discussions, the district provided a tour of Stony Brook Elementary School before the regular board meeting, highlighting aging infrastructure concerns that already require significant attention. Facilities Director Tom Quinn led the walkthrough, pointing out key areas in need of repair or replacement.
Now 23 years old, Stony Brook’s roof is nearing the end of its lifespan and has begun to leak in multiple locations, including the music room, where water damage is a growing concern. Portions of the flat roof, which was expected to last around 20 years, is now showing signs of failure across the building.
Beyond the roof, flooding remains a major issue due to the school’s location at one of the lowest points in the Brandon Farms development. During heavy rainstorms, hallways flood, and standing water collects in certain areas, posing safety hazards. Last year, several inches of water pooled in the school, underscoring the need for better drainage solutions.
Other maintenance challenges include:
- Steel Door Frames Deteriorating – The use of calcium chloride for ice control has corroded steel-framed doors, necessitating replacements.
- HVAC System Struggles – Stony Brook relies on a water-source heat pump system, but after more than 22 years, the well field has warmed significantly, reducing efficiency. Groundwater temperatures that should support heating and cooling are now returning too warm during hot days severely limiting air conditioning effectiveness. Supplemental cooling solutions have been necessary to try and compensate.
- Cafeteria HVAC Issues – Unlike the rest of the school, the cafeteria is not heated with geothermal energy, requiring frequent manual fixes to maintain proper temperature control and the units need to be replaced.
“Stuff that used to last just doesn’t anymore,” Assistant Superintendent Robert Colavita remarked during the tour. “Companies go out of business and don’t support the systems they built. Sometimes it costs less to replace than to repair.”
The district’s in-house maintenance team continues to make necessary repairs, but without major capital investments, Colavita and other officials warned that larger-scale replacements may soon be unavoidable.
