BOE president calls on Princeton Council to share PILOT money with public schools
The president of the Princeton Board of Education today asked the Princeton Council to share money from the payments in lieu of taxes (PILOT) agreements the council has negotiated with developers of luxury apartment projects with the public schools. The funds would help the district accommodate more students and maintain the quality of its educational programming.
Tonight, the Princeton Council is set to vote on whether to approve an application for a tax exemption and PILOT agreement with the redeveloper of the former Princeton Seminary tract on Stockton Street. The development includes 238 luxury apartments with a 20% affordable housing set aside, the minimum percentage of affordable units required for Princeton developments of five units or more.
“We appreciate the work of our colleagues on the Council, and we want to ensure that together we plan effectively for the future of a community that prioritizes the success of our school children,” said Board of Education President Dafna Kendal. “We hope the Council will consider our heartfelt recommendation that PILOT payments for residential development be shared with the schools, in order to help us support additional schoolchildren while lessening the cost to taxpayers of maintaining the high level of teaching and learning, robust programs, and other educational services that are expected by our community for all students.”
The seminary agreement would be the fourth PILOT agreement approved by the council in recent years. None of the agreements have provided funding for the school district, even though the new developments are expected to bring more schoolchildren to the district as Princeton’s population grows. The Princeton Master Plan projects the overall population will grow by 10%.
“We reasonably expect the number of school children to grow proportionately with the overall population,” Kendal said. “Yet the school district is limited by state law to a maximum tax levy increase of 2 percent per year, with some exceptions. PILOT monies could help us pay additional teachers and sustain academic programming and student services. The state doesn’t require municipalities to allocate a portion of PILOT payments to schools, but in cases where redevelopment will yield additional housing units, it makes sense to do so.”
Krystal Knapp is the founding editor of Planet Princeton. Follow her on Twitter @krystalknapp. She can be reached via email at editor AT planetprinceton.com. Send all letters to the editor and press releases to that email address.
It is my understanding that schools are NOT limited to 2% annual budget increase. What they ARE required to do is if they wish to increase the budget more than 2% they have to put it up for a public vote and get a majority of voters to approve it. I don’t think this has changed in the years since I was more involved.
And who will be paying for the increase above 2%? The residents. We will be subsidizing the developers. That’s really the point and that’s why the district wants its fair share.
Shifting the burden of funding afordable housing from the Federal and State level to the local communities results in local property taxes being the primary funding source for new low cost rental housing. Without profit, builders/devlopers cannot justify building and Maintaining low cost housing. Rental collection on low cost rental housing does not allow for a sufficient profit. Municipalities have been burdened by the Courts to provide low cost housing. Use of NJ State Law concerning PILOTS is a current mechanism available to Municipalities (that are primarily funded by local property taxes) to weedel some “token low cost housing”. The NJ rules/regs concerning PILOTS does not permit their use for educational costs. The end product is that local property tax payers fund much of the increased educational costs on projects that involve PILOT funding to entice developers.
As usual developers get their money and bolt leaving the resulting burden on the existing taxpayers.
The state laws need to change to put a financial infrastructure responsibility on these companies.
If Princeton Council was interested in sharing funds with the students of Princeton they would have invited a representative from the Board of Education to join in the PILOT negotiations. Mayor and BOE speak of working together yet have not seen them together during any public meetings. Not once. The school budget is 50 percent of a taxpayers town tax. Taxpayers continue to give Council and BOE blank checks for their inability to formulate and stick to a budget resulting in unchecked spending and higher and higher taxes. The BOE budget is already $100,000,000. Watch the $89,000,000 school referendum pass in January. Next up is Council’s need to purchase Westminster for $50,000,000. If you don’t watch your money someone else will. Even middle school children can determine a want from a need. Council is making Princeton unaffordable to all with an average household tax of $25,000. Seniors are forced to move out, which is shameful.
Princeton Charter is ranked by US News and Reports as #2 for NJ elementary schools and #5 or 6 for NJ middle schools. Princeton Charter charges less per pupil than the other PPS. Couldn’t the Board of Education follow the model of Princeton Charter to have higher achieving schools for the rest of town students at a similar lower cost to taxpayers? I don’t understand how it is contentious for a candidate for the Board of Education to have a student at Charter but having a current Council member (Council determines BOE budget) with a student at Charter is not a conflict of interest. It would benefit everyone in town if Council, BOE and Charter could work collaboratively. We encourage our children to actively listen to each other to work together toward a mutually beneficial goal. Maybe 2025 is the year for a joint commission because the inability to stabilize taxes and the reliance on bonds and referendums is becoming an untenable tax burden for the limited number of Princeton residents.