Resident Refutes Claims Made at December 16 Town Council Meeting

A contentious Parsippany Town Council meeting on December 16 revealed deep divisions between local officials and the Board of Education over proposed development agreements that could significantly impact the school system.

During the meeting, Board of Education President Alison Cogan voiced strong concerns about two Payment in Lieu of Taxes (PILOT) projects up for consideration. She warned that these developments could bring approximately 400 additional students to the district, compounding enrollment increases from previous PILOT agreements.

Cogan highlighted that the Board has unsuccessfully attempted to negotiate a revenue-sharing agreement with the town for the past two years. She argued that no evidence suggests PILOT financial incentives are necessary for redevelopment under existing plans, and criticized the lack of transparency, noting that financial agreements supporting the proposed ordinance weren’t made available for public review before the meeting.

Following Cogan’s remarks, Council President Carifi presented a different perspective, claiming the Parq developer had offered to donate land to the Board of Education and provide PILOT money to build “a new state-of-the-art school.” According to sources present, Carifi suggested the BOE had rejected this offer, though critics note no formal written proposal was ever provided for consideration.

The dispute highlights the ongoing tension between municipal revenue generation and educational funding priorities in Parsippany. At issue is a $10,000 per student offer submitted by the town to the BOE in May, which excluded the 1515 Rt. 10 development and future PILOT projects. Before responding, the BOE filed an Open Public Records Act (OPRA) request in June seeking copies of existing PILOT contracts. Despite the standard 10-day response window, the town extended its deadline to July 8.

After reviewing these documents, the BOE countered with a $15,000 per student proposal that would include the 1515 Rt. 10 project and future PILOTs. According to Cogan, the town did not respond until November, after local elections. When Mayor James Barberio finally responded on December 15, his counter-offer of $12,000 per student reportedly contained restrictions deemed unacceptable by all nine BOE members.

A significant point of contention in the meeting was the financial analysis presented by Michael Hawley of NW Financial Group. Hawley cited a projected Internal Rate of Return (IRR) of 4.65% on the development, claiming this fell below the risk-free rate of return. However, observers noted this assertion was factually incorrect, as the current risk-free rate (typically measured by 10-year U.S. Treasury bonds) stands at 4.13%.

Questions also emerged about other aspects of the financial analysis. Discrepancies appeared in calculations using the Net Operating Income figure of $23,273,328, which when divided by the stated 5% rate produces $465,466,560, not the $423,151,412 presented by consultants—a difference of $42.3 million that went unexplained.

The discussion also revealed significant disagreement over projected student enrollment impacts. While the BOE anticipates approximately 400 new students from the developments, a Rutgers University study suggests a figure closer to 151 students. This uncertainty underscores the BOE’s push for a per-student revenue-sharing agreement rather than fixed payments.

The situation in Parsippany reflects broader challenges with New Jersey’s PILOT legislation. State lawmakers have recognized these issues, with Senate Bill S3915 seeking to reform tax abatement rules by requiring municipalities to share certain PILOT payments with school districts and improve information sharing with counties, school districts, and the Department of Community Affairs.

Critics of the town administration point to a lack of transparency regarding how additional PILOT revenues would be utilized. Without a clear public explanation of intended uses for these funds, residents are left questioning whether the town’s priorities align with community needs, particularly in education.

As the meeting concluded, the contentious atmosphere suggested ongoing challenges for the incoming administration, which will inherit these unresolved disputes between municipal government and school officials.