Dear Editor:
Parsippany residents deserve straight answers about our schools and tax dollars. Unfortunately, some election commentary circulating on social media has become a fountain of misinformation. It leaves out key facts and makes school funding harder to understand.
Here is what the published record shows.
A proposal is not a final agreement. In May 2025, then-Board of Education Vice President Andy Choffo described a township proposal that could potentially provide millions of dollars to our schools through revenue sharing from PILOT developments. PILOT stands for Payment in Lieu of Taxes, a development tax arrangement. He said he hoped an agreement would be reached. He did not say a deal was done.
Parsippany Focus also reported that Barberio posted, then removed, a video claiming a binding school revenue-sharing agreement existed. The report stated that no final agreement had been approved.
Discussing a proposal or asking for changes does not mean the Board approved it. Negotiations are how the details get worked out before a final agreement is ready for a vote.
A private conversation is not Board approval. An individual Board member may discuss ideas with township officials. But an understanding between individuals does not mean the Board agreed. If someone claims there was a completed deal, they should show the written agreement and when the Board approved it.
The Board responded, and months passed before discussions resumed. According to the Board’s published statement, its attorney sent a proposed funding ordinance to the Township Attorney in July 2025. The Board reported no official response until November 24, when then-Mayor James Barberio requested a meeting. Township representatives and a Board subcommittee met on December 4.
Leaving those months out gives voters an incomplete picture. Anyone questioning the Board’s actions should also examine the Barberio administration’s delay in responding.
Every student deserves the same education, regardless of where they live. The question is how PILOT developments contribute toward its cost. A change in total enrollment does not settle that funding question.
The 2% cap also needs an explanation. It generally limits growth in the school tax levy—the money raised through school property taxes—with certain adjustments allowed. It does not mean every school expense rises by only 2%. Simply subtracting 2% from an inflation figure does not tell us what the district needs.
Using savings still costs money, but it can avoid an additional tax increase. Capital reserves are money set aside for major projects that will serve students for many years—much like saving for a major home improvement. Parsippany Focus reported that the Littleton expansion was funded through those reserves. That is public money, but using money already saved is different from raising additional taxes to pay for the project.
Residents should ask questions, challenge spending, and demand records. Board members should answer clearly. Candidates should also check their claims before repeating them.
Adding a sarcastic “Got that?” does not turn an incomplete story into a fact.
With the November 3 Board of Education election approaching, this fountain of misinformation only muddies the waters for voters trying to make an informed choice. Those asking for the public’s trust should meet a basic standard: present the full record, explain the facts accurately, and correct misleading claims.
Our students and taxpayers deserve better than campaign rhetoric dressed up as accountability.
Tim Berrios
Parsippany resident and candidate for re-election to the Board of Education
Copyright 2026 Zoomus Marketing, LLC. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed without permission from the publisher.
