BSD Board of Education Meeting - August 2025

001Uh, good evening everybody. We're going to call the August 18, 2025 meeting of the Brandy Wine School District Board of Education to order. It's 7:03 p.m. We're in the multi-purpose room at Mount Pleasant Elementary School. Can I ask Mr. acrement to lead us in the pledge of >> allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. [Music] >> Can I have a motion for approval of the agenda? So moved. >> Second. John and Ralph. All in favor? >> I that moves us to the superintendent report. Dr. Lawson. >> Good evening, Board President Heler, members of the board, members of our audience and community. We continue our focus on student outcomes data as the primary driver

002of this superintendent report. Tonight's data dive relates to our statemandated Smarter Balance test scores just released last week by the Delaware Department of Education. Before we examine our district's data, I'd like to remind everyone that Smarter is a sumitive assessment or a test, a snapshot of a single point in time to assess proficiency or mastery of every Common Core standard in both ELA and math. That proficiency is further measured by a single cut score, not a continuum or a range of scores. Smarter scores do not define our children, their full potential, nor do they capture the breadth of skills, readiness, and growth our students demonstrate as they pave their path to a career or college and life success. It is inaccurate and inappropriate to correlate smarter proficiency with other metrics like graduation rates, college and

003career readiness rates or any other standardized standardized measure that has its own purpose. All the data metrics combined presented through the calendar year to this board provide a collective picture of Brandy Wine student outcomes, performance, and progress. This first slide shows Smarter ELA proficiency over time. Proficiency on Smarter Balance is the percentage of students who earn an achievement level three or four on the test. Achievement levels three or four means that you have shown mastery of every single standard in that grade level and some or many above the grade level. Brandy Wine's overall ELA proficiency in grades 3 through 8 climbed two points in school year 25, resulting in a four-point lead over the state proficiency rates. While we are not satisfied with these scores and realize that we've not yet returned to preandemic proficiency

004levels, we are pleased that we are on the rise and making progress towards it. Here is our math proficiency over time for students who earned an achievement level three or four in mathematics on the test. Again, we see a steady increase over the last three years, but not yet returning to the proficiency levels we were seeing prior to CO. Brandy Wine's math proficiency is higher than the state average. as well. Here is a different way to look at smarter ELA achievement levels to better understand where our students are related to their mastery or proficiency of grade level standards. When you look more closely at smarter scores, we see the same 45% of Brandy Wine students who met or exceeded grade level standards in ELA with the score of three or four, but an additional 22%

005of our students nearly met proficiency or grade level standards by attaining achievement level two. Students who score in achievement level two could have mastered all but one of the ELA standards at grade level and missed the single cut score to an achievement level three by one point. Yet they remain at an achievement level two. Here is the same information shown in mathematics. 37% of Brandy Wine students met or exceeded grade level standards with the three or a four, but an additional 25% of students nearly met proficiency. While ELA is more consistent across grades with roughly 33% of students not meeting or approaching grade level expectations, in math, we see that those gaps to grade level increase over time. So why show you the data this way? Because there is a false narrative out there that

006because proficiency rates are lower than expected, our students are unable to read, write or compute math at the most at the most basic levels. That cannot be further from the truth. Our students are learning at high levels using rigorous standards and expectation expectations and there is a continuum of learning and student performance that must be shown to better explain the data that you're seeing. Another way of viewing the data is to look at our relative performance in Delaware. So here we provide a comparison of Brandy Wine School District to the other 16 Delaware public school districts. Remember that VOTE school districts, one for each county, do not administer Smarter Balance, so they are not included in this comparison. Thus, 16 is the comparison, not 19. Because Brandy Wine's growth in proficiency has outrun the state

007average, our district ranking has improved in ELA from eighth in the first year of Smarter Balance to now fourth in the state in school year 25. In math, we started as the seventh ranked district in the first year of Smarter Balance testing in 2015, fell to as low as 10th, and have now risen back to the fifth ranked district in the state. Just because we are fourth and fifth in the state does not mean we are complacent or satisfied with this data. We will continue to work hard to grow every child to proficiency and their full potential with the support of our families and the community. Last week, we had the pleasure of welcoming an inspiring group of educators during our new teacher orientation event. From those who have chosen Brandy Wine to begin their

008teaching careers to experienced educators eager to start a new chapter, we are honored you've joined our BSD family. We'd like to take a moment to extend our sincere thanks to our facilities and custodial staff for their outstanding work in preparing our school buildings for the start of the new year. Their dedication, attention to detail, and hard work over the summer ensure that our students and staff return to clean, safe, and welcoming learning environments. We truly appreciate their commitment to our schools and community. As we kick off the 2526 school year, I invite students, families, and staff to celebrate with BSD by submitting their first day of school photos. BSD first days of school signs available for every school and grade. Plus, employee year versions can be downloaded and printed at our website www.brandywineschools.org/backtoschool. We look

009forward to sharing your first day smiles across our BSD channels. And finally, our August sizzle video. [Music] Good looking. Yes. Good job. Touch. >> You got it. Yeah, girl. [Music] super 917 WP. That was the pretenders. Don't get me wrong. >> Every summer, the site interns come from the site program and kind of take over the radio station. They're learning how to DJ, a voice track. They made a great crop of PSAs, public service announcements, all kinds of um tasks related to, you know, broadcast communication, uh not only for their own growth, but for you know the consumption of the community. It's it goes on the radio station owned by the BSD, WNP. Heat. Heat. [Music] Heat. Heat. [Music] Heat. Heat. [Music] [Applause] [Music] [Applause] President Heler, that concludes this month's report. >> Thank you.

010Any questions for Dr. Lawson? >> That video reminded me that today was the first day back for many of our educators and staff. So, huge welcome back to them. And that moves us on to public comment. Just as a reminder, the public comment portion of the meeting allows members of the public to address the board on any agenda items or educational topics. And board policy uh limits the allocated time per speaker to two minutes. Um, we're going to go in the room first. Um, Maria Blaki, I hope I pronounced that correctly. I should know how to pronounce it. >> Bluchi. Good evening everyone. It's nice to be back. Um I retired three years ago from Brandy Wine School District and um I'm here tonight actually on the behalf of my elderly neighbors who don't have

011access or don't check social media. And of course the concern is the increase in tax revenue on their schoolboard portion of their tax bills. Many of the elderly residents um pay their taxes in one lump sum. it's not included in their mortgage. Some of them are looking at increases of $1,600 to $2,000 and they just don't have the money for it. I know the legislature went to bat for us last week and gave the school boards a timeline to see if they were going to split the tax as well. So, myself and be are here tonight just to find out what's going on at the school board level to give us any to give them any relief if possible. Thank you. And that uh that is on the agenda in item nine. So we'll be

012discussing that tonight. Um and then uh there's one other in the room. >> Thank you. >> John Pope. >> Hi. Good evening. Uh ladies and gentlemen of the board. Um I'd like to just kind of tag team with that about honestly shock and dismay at the amount of the tax increase my tax um in the last two years the school tax increased over 62%. I have a mid-priced home and I re as far as the last meeting went sorry not the last meeting the referendum where I understand that it was a 45 cents on $100 or something along those lines $4.50 increase. Um I feel like that was somewhat slipped under the radar for most of the citizens. I understand that the board complied with the code that you would have uh published in the

013newspaper four times, post on the doors of the schools and be on the website. However, for a increase of this amount, especially in conjunction um with a vice chancellor's ruling that we had to all have our property reassessed, many of us in the community are hit with a huge tax increase. And I would put to you as members of the board that your duty not lies only to the children. And I understand that your first priority is making sure the schools have what you perceive they need. That we all have increasing costs. I would be very interested to find out what measures were taken to decrease costs before this, you know, very extreme increase. Um I think that's about it, but I wanted to start here, but I'm going to be following this in other

014in other ways. Thank you for your time. Thank you, Mr. Pope. And I believe we have um one comment online. Is that correct? Um Ying Zang. >> Uh yes, I'm here. Um can you hear me? Okay. Hello. Can you hear me? I assume you can hear me, right? >> Yes, we can hear you. >> Okay. Thank you. Thank you for the for the opportunity to let me talk about this topic. Again, same with the first two other um persons um is about the school tax. Um I remember I went to one of the meetings for the um referendum. I remember there was a slide showing like illustrating how much increase and going to be two step increase first year and second year. So my understanding is that the second year is actually slightly less than

015the first year. So when I look at my bills like first year the increase for the school tax is $235. Now I got the second year increase. You know how much it is? It's over $800. So that's really a big big big surprise to me. And when I reviewed the promotion material, I mean the referendum promotion material, I just felt that um to be honest this number just make me feel I was if not like to I was misled on this matter and like the other two people um we understand school needs more money. Um but we all have higher bills to pay u especially I'm thinking about retire retirement in in a few years. So I don't know what to do about it. Um just just to voice my concern. Um I really hope

016school can consider if they're going to reimburse us for the actual increase kind of go back to what the referendum talks about it. I would appreciate that. Thank you very much. That's all from me. >> Thank you. Um and like I mentioned, I hope everybody can hang around until item nine, which is where we're going to discuss that. I I do want to share one comment I guess since all three of the comments were about the tax increase and um just a reminder for those like myself that saw a pretty large increase. Um the largest part of that increase was simply a result of the reassessment process causing a realignment of tax liability based on the new assessed values. So, as a district, we are receiving the same amount of revenue this year that we

017would have received this year had it not been for the reassessment process. Um, so we're going to be discussing some options later in and uh under section 9 here. Um, but that said, as you'll hear, there's no magic pill, right, that fixes this short of there being an audit of the new assessed values and their accuracy. Um I guess but I've been giving out my personal example because I know there's a lot of questions about what the referendum impact was on the increases that we saw. So um my home um increased $574%. So my tax increase was a little over $1,500 this year. Out of that $1,500, $214.77 was attributed to the referendum, which is about $10 more than would have been under my old assessed value. So a very very small part of the

018increase that people are seeing are attributed to year two of the referendum. The majority of it is directly attributed to the realignment of values based on that new uh assessed value. So if anybody u feel free to to email me after the meeting and I'd be happy to provide um lots of examples that show um how that's the case. Um that's what I've been trying to do for the past couple weeks. So I've been happy I'd be happy to do that. U that moves us on to board business. Mr. Acriman, DSBA executive committee. >> Yes. Um and in answer to some board questions, uh there is attached the 2024 DSB annual report as well as a uh discussion of DSBA benefits. Um excuse me. We had the DSBA annual meeting on August 9th. Um Mr.

019Lavoy and I were able to attend. Uh we did honor u board members uh for their service for if you had five years or 10 years 5 years or more you received a plaque from the spa. Uh less than 5 years you got a a certificate of achievement. It was a very nice affair. I wish uh we had better traffic. Uh getting to Milford on a Saturday morning is not the easiest thing to do. Uh but it was a very nice uh affair. The first meeting will be September 4th, I believe. No, I'm sorry. September 3rd. Our meeting is September 4th. >> Right. Next up, Mr. Lavoy, DSBA Legislative Committee. >> The DSBA Legislative Committee won't meet uh for the first time until October. >> All right. Um, next up, we're going to table the

020advisory and assessment committee on equity. um they have not met and per board policy the board would have to provide them with a new charge moving forward because the timeline for their previous charge expired and we're going to be discussing that at our September workshop and that moves us on to district finance committee. Mr. Scrubot uh district finance committee held its meeting last Wednesday, August 13th. Uh I did not attend. I was out of town. Uh Mr. McCoy will review what was discussed regarding the monthly financial report, the August 1st financial position. Um, I understand there was some robust conversation regarding uh the reassessments. Um, and Mr. McCoy's presentation later this evening for the tax warrant update. Uh the next meeting for the finance committee will be Wednesday, September 10th at 5:00 pm with uh

021here at the board conference room and a Zoom link I'm sure will be posted on the district web page. >> Great. Um health and wellness is me. Our first meeting for the year will be November 20th. Uh maintenance advisory committee, Mr. Njami. Uh yes, there was a meeting on July 15th at Darly Road. Um there was a review of the certificate of necessity, the submission that will be discussed later tonight under section 8. Um the committee toward the entire school and reviewed uh upcoming minor cap projects for the site and the next meeting will be on August 22nd at Concord High School. Parent council for students with disabilities is Mr. Jordan who is absent tonight. I did speak to him today though and he let me know that the first meeting of the year will

022be September 8th for that committee. Parent and citizens advisory, Miss Stock. >> Um we have not met. We will have our first uh meeting in October. >> Perfect. Uh Wilmington Learning Collaborative. Mr. and Jimmy, >> we had a meeting on August 6th where we reviewed the uh summer learning events that occurred that were supported by the WLC. Um end of year school data as well were submitted and presented by the WLC. Um and uh we also discussed the priorities for the WLC going forward with the next year. I will also state that um the uh executive for the WLC, Dr. Bergos, uh put out a warning or perhaps a a discussion that the WLC due to state funding issues was in a somewhat precarious position. And I mentioned that not so much for specifics with

023regards to the WLC, but just to provide a context in the sense of there are a lot of funding issues, a lot of questions federal, state that are going on that are affecting uh WLC, but it have the ability to affect a whole host of districts as well. >> Thank you. Uh 97.1 WMPH advisory, Mr. Lavoy. >> Uh I'm going to take that for Mr. Lavoy. And just a little typo there, 91.7 Super Wmp um we had our meeting uh July July 14th. Um Mr. Wishingrad updated us regarding the uh interns from the BSD site program. I had been visiting WPH on Tuesdays and Thursday mornings. Uh just one of the many job sites for the site interns to get hands-on work experience. Um they were involved with DJing, voice tracking, recording public service announcements,

024uh promos, and family interviews. Also, in the wake of the Department of Education's pathway approval earlier this year, uh Mr. Wishingrad continues to meet with Wilmington University to align our two broadcast journalism programs uh for this upcoming school year. Uh you'll be able to see BSD promoting, especially through our high school open houses, the broadcast journalism pathway alongside all of the other CTE pathways throughout the district. Um we will should have this fully um completed by June of 26 um at the end of that school year. Um, also WPH broadcasted throughout the period for the most part 24/7. There was a brief uh brief outage on June 19th related to uh thunderstorm power outage and flooding in the local area. So, we did have a little downtime. And last but not least, Mr. Wishingrad uh

025continues to work on a long-standing project uh for compiling uh an overall operations manual for the uh radio station and everything that goes along with that. Our next meeting uh we don't have a exact date but will tenatively be uh in the month of November. So until then tune in to super 917 WPH and for additional board members report I have one to start. I attended the athletic facilities workg groupoup meeting on August 13th at Springier. Um the meeting started with a history of the work group that was formed coming out of the last referendum and this group was formed specifically to gather feedback um and and give input on needs as they relate to athletics in the district. Uh we reviewed all of the proposed certificate of necessities that you're going to hear about

026shortly from Mr. Reid. So I won't um duplicate that effort. Um and then we learned of just some other sports specific updates throughout the district. Um for example, the high school athletic trainers are now employed directly by the district at quite a cost savings over contracting that with a third party like we have in the past. Um we've also added assistant athletic directors to the high schools to help with the increasing um interest and uh workload that they have coordinating all of the sports teams. Um and uh the committee uh mostly Dr. Rivera um and the facilities committee are working on auditing and updating the facilities use policies, guidelines and fees to make sure that we are recovering all costs that are um going out because of outside users use of our property. Does anyone

027else have uh additional board reports? >> Yes, uh Mr. President. Um, I just would like to just report back that I did meet with John Reid and Representative Larry Lambert and also this young man over here whose name I don't recall. Um, there's a piece of land that used to be a softball field uh near Claymont Elementary that uh they would like to turn into a garden. I think it's a great idea. I think Mr. Reed will probably be bringing back in September time frame um a lease that we can collaborate uh to help create this garden. It's at the moment the land is basically landlocked. It sits sort of behind the um the old facilities building and on the on sort of the the right of the old football field. But it's it's a

028it's a nice piece of property. I think it's a great use and Representative Lambert is um there to help uh with funding. There's a grant that I believe um has been gotten to help with that. So, I just wanted to bring it to the board's attention and something that will be coming up. >> Thank you. Any other board member reports? >> Right. That moves on to item five, the consent agenda. Is there a motion to approve the consent agenda? >> So moved. >> Okay, Mr. Acriman. >> Second, Miss Stock. All in favor? >> I. Any opposed? >> Motion carries. Um item six, personnel matters. Is there a motion to accept the personnel matters as discussed in executive session? >> So moved. >> Second Jimmy, Mr. Lavoy. All in favor? >> I. >> Any opposed? >>

029Motion carries. Item seven is student matters. The motion to accept the student matters is discussed in executive session. >> Second. >> Stock and Mr. Scorbot. All in favor? I I >> I. Any opposed? Motion carries. Item eight, old business. Uh, Mr. Acriman, the policy review committee. >> Yeah, I I appreciate some of the feedback I got from folks uh at the workshop that I was unable to attend. I do apologize for being ill that day. Uh, but someone made a very good point which is um we have policy 1.03 which talks about how to do policy and and form policies. Um, so I'd like to withdraw the actual policy that I suggested and I would like to just uh add just some wording to B5. So instead of um reading review and reporting, all policies

030including this policy shall be reviewed by the superintendent or designate and reported as directed by the Bernie Wine board of education. the superintendent shall annually report any regarding new policies or revisions existing policies the superintendent deems warranted. Um I think if we just amend that slightly to all Brandy Wine board policies including this policy shall be reviewed by the policy review committee established by the board in conjunction with the superintendent. The board president will appoint members and any other stakeholders to participate in the review. Each policy shall be reviewed annually and revisions will be referred to the board for review, discussion and adoption. I sent a copy of that wording old and new to everybody uh in your BSD email right now. So you have it. So if we you know look at that maybe

031uh I think it was the first time you're seeing this particular wording. So maybe we can bring it back next month um as an update to 1.03 versus a whole new policy. Okay. Any questions? We'll bring that back as a final read for next month. Uh Mr. Reid, uh 8B, Certificates of Necessity. Hopefully this is Oh, there we go. Um, I'm going to go through the certificate of necessity. This is the third time that we're presenting this. Uh, we have already been given a heads up by the Department of Education that um they're recommending to districts. You can either submit or not submit, but they're most likely not going to have any funds to fund anything this year. But they also told us a certificate of necessities, a way for them to determine what the

032needs are throughout the state. So that's why at the end of this there's a another project added for future consideration. So um most likely I'll be before the board next year this time. Um but we'll go through the presentation as to what we are going to be asking the state for. Next slide please. Battery here. Uh the process here is that you submit to the state um by the end of August and that requires board approval. Um the department of education has till the end of October to review it and get back to the district. From there we have a year and a half to take it to voters but as I said it it is most likely we are going to hear that what we are asking for is not going to be supported

033because of other ongoing projects in the state. Next slide. We are in phase five. We've been renovating our building since 1994 with a debt expense that's gone up and down. Like when you pay off a car loan, that frees up money to get um another car loan. But you have to keep up on a cycle for these schools because the maintenance dollars um do not keep up with the building needs. And there's a threshold once a project gets above $1 million, you have to go to major cap improvement. Um so the projects are Mount Pleasant Elementary full renovation full renovation of Mount Pleasant High site program that is a new facility inclusive playgrounds would hit all our elementary school athletic fields um updates for our secondary schools and a request to get in line for

034our conquered high school. Uh next slide. Mount Pleasant Elementary would be a full renovation. Um the roof on the building is now 93 years old. I change that slide every year to add one more year. Um the main point when you come up to Mount Pleas Elementary, it was a school when people used to walk to school. And now with the parking lot in the back, it's disjointed from the public like you guys entering in tonight from the public. This building's very hard to figure out where to get into it and the students here have to use breadcrumbs to get around. Um the idea here is that we'd move the main entry point to the back of the building. Uh the gym, the cafeteria right now is in the gym. Um that's the way they

035did it when they reopened the school. This building was closed for a matter of time and when they put the cafeteria in, it's in the gym. The cafeteria looks like more like a place to store a plane than it is for elementary school kids to have lunch. And the kindergarten classrooms in this building are roughly 650 ft. The DOE standard is 1,200 square ft. So most of the walls in this building are non-loadaring like other schools that we've renovated. We've made the classrooms fit today's education. The kindergarten wing of this building was added in 1936. Kindergarten was a lot different than in 1936. This used to be three separate buildings. They were all joined together in 1971. Uh, next slide. I don't know if I mentioned, but the roof is uh from 1932. Uh, the

036slate portion of the roof is original. Um, and this building has well over 11 additions. So, every time we work on this building, it uh we have to do a lot of history and a lot of research, but it's it just kept on growing and growing and growing. So, this building has been a K through 12. It's been a middle school, it's been a high school, and now it's an elementary school. So, this building has pretty much been everything. Uh, next slide. Mount Pleasant High School is 1958. We're talking about a full renovation. Uh, there's a lot of utility work required. The music department is in the lower level. The music programs at Mount Pleasant High School are thriving. The kids don't fit in the programs. They're having to use the auditorium and other spaces

037as classroom. If you go to Mount Pleasant High, the choir is practicing in the hallway. They sound great, but they um the music rooms at Claymont Elementary are larger than the music rooms at Mount Pleasant High School. Uh there's some ADA code compliance issues. There's currently 10 classrooms in the school where a child in a wheelchair can't access because of where they're located in the building. And also we want to simplify the floor plan on the lower level. The lower level used to be the district office for Mount Pleasant School District which um was built years and years ago. And to get down there, the areas really don't connect. So we're going to simplify the floor plan. Next slide, please. Um this slide shows the original building, first floor in blue, and it shows in

038green where we would add some space. This is to get the students and the programs out of the lower level. The lower level is built on a spring. Not the best place to do it. The green area in the back of the building was supposed to be the swimming pool that they never built. So that gives us real estate to add an addition to the building. We can build that while the students are there, not bother a soul. Um build additional classrooms. We can build use for swing space and then eventually make them into band chorus and the other music programs that they offer. Next slide, please. Um, the systems in the building are just simply at the end of their life. Some of the systems are from the '9s, but many of the systems

039are from the 50s. And that room there with a pump in it, there are 12 rooms like that in the building that are continuously pumping pumping the spring water out of the building. Now, I wish we could bottle it and sell it, but uh, no, there's always a little bit of water running in the basement. So, we have alarms on that. It is on a generator, but this is just one of the things you have to do when you keep up with Mount Pleasant High School. Next slide, please. Um the problems at Mount Pleasant High are are big ones. They built the building deeper than the sewer line. So in the basement, that set of stairs that goes up and over, that's the sewer line. So on the whole lower level, there are no bathrooms.

040So it's our intention to take it outside, direct everything outside. Uh but these are not simple problems. Now, the one thing about Mount Pleasant High is people would ask, well then why would you do this? By today's standards, Mount Pleasant High would be built at half the square footage. Mount Pleasant High is a very well-built building. The number to renovate Mount Pleasant High is less than half the cost of building a new one. Mount Pleasant High is 270,000 square foot. If we were to build a new building, the state would only allow us roughly 120,000 square foot or or you know somewhere in that range. Actually, it's 177 plus we'd have to add some space. So, we would lose roughly 100,000 square foot if we were to build new. Next slide, please. inclusive playgrounds. Uh

041there's this is a photo from Forward Elementary. There was nothing better. We got some grant money, built a playground there that everybody could use. Playground manufacturers don't build the best of equipment for a child who is in wheelchair or disabled. Kids just want to play with kids. Also, our playgrounds are aging. So, this would build inclusive playgrounds. We have nine elementary schools. This would build inclusive playgrounds at eight of them because the playground cost is built into Mount Pleasant Elementary's playground. Uh, this would put in play surfaces other than mulch, which is ADA compliant by code, but tell a parent that who has a child in a wheelchair who their child cannot play with their friends. Um, so this is to take care of this at all our elementary schools. And let's be honest, our

042playgrounds are verging on the age of 20, 25 years. Useful life of a playground is 20 25 years. And um if we do if we're able to get grant money for any of our other schools and take care of this beforehand, of course we wouldn't need the funds to do any schools if we're able to do that. Um but it this goes back to separate is not equal. Uh next slide. The site program. Um this is skills for independent transition to employment. This is our 19 to 22 year old program. We are leasing space right now in the Claymont community center. We have property on 202. This photograph is what Cape Penal Open has. It looks like four retail stores outside, but when you get inside, it's one classroom for the students with a commercial

043kitchen so they can get their serve safe certificates to get jobs out there working in kitchens. We have property on 202, some great property on 202. This would be a billboard for district and more importantly a billboard for these students. people from the public would get to meet these students and that'll assist them in their um desire to get a job. Right now being buried in the Claymont Community Center is no way to meet these students. And quite honestly, when you're renting space, we can't send our people into change a space. We can't add electrical outlets. We can't do a lot of the things that we need to do for an everchanging program. So, this is an example of what K penalopin has. We're looking to build something similar. Would not be that large a

044structure, but on the 202 piece of property, you can see our Brandy Wine operations center. The idea would be to build next to that Mission Barbecue's there. That parking lot next to Mission Barbecue, that's BSD property. So, that puts us right in a retail center and we would put our technology and school nut nutrition department on the second floor and they could work with these students. Next slide, please. Athletic fields. Um, we have seen, our students are seeing what's happening down south and all the athletic facilities. You go to any of the schools down south and they have proper um places to sell concessions and proper places for bathrooms and locker rooms. At our high schools, we have portaots. Um the tracks which were paid for by a referendum from 2000 um were supposed to

045have a 10-year life. We've gotten 25 years out of them, but they need to be replaced at the tune of 450,000 per track. We have six of them in totals. Um our high school softball and baseball fields do not have dugouts. We're starting to get a few in, but we really don't have them. And this shows two turf fields per per high school. um also some ADA access to our fields and this also includes some work at the middle schools primarily the track um reconstruction. Next slide. Um the certificate necessity Mount Pleasant Elementary is 76 million. Mount Pleasant High School is now listed at 92 million. Inclusive playgrounds is a little over 5 million. The site program is 11.7 and athletics fields is listed at 41.8. You can see on the breakdown there, the local

046side is 40%, the state side is 60%. That would be our ask if approved. Next slide, please. Same information. I guess I just made it prettier. Uh, next slide. Conquered High School. Um, Conquered High School was the start of the construction was 1968, but was not finished till 72. It sat unfinished for a year and a half during a strike. It was last renovated in 2003. The board was presented in 2000 a report from a structural engineer recommending in 2000 that conquered be rebuilt due to masonry issues. The board chose at that time to renovate the building. Money was put in the budget when we renovated it. That money fell short to the tune of $3 million. So, we had to spend $3 million more in 2003 by transferring money from other projects. I want

047to be clear on this. Conquered is safe. Conquered a good school. But there gets to be a point when that renovation cycle comes back again. You have to decide, do you build new or do you replace? This decision is a decision that needs to be made in the next 10 years. Rebuilding Conquered is for the kids who are in kindergarten now. It's not for today, but we have to get in line because our other districts putting in for new schools. Conquered High School's brick and the exterior of the building is something that we inspect annually, keep up with. I have engineers coming on Wednesday. This was our inspection of last summer, but it's something we have to keep up with. It's something where a third of the brick has already been removed from the building.

048So, when you drive by the building, you see the stuckle on the second floor. That used to be brick. That was removed. the top 10 feet of the building all the way around was removed. The pre-cast um shifted a little bit during the last earthquake, believe it or not. Um that's all tied in together. We've reassened it to the building, but it's something we need to keep an eye on. So, the recommendation for a new school for conquered to fill the formula. Conquered is 210,000 square ft. By DOE formula, we are eligible for the number of students we have for 177,000 square feet. DOE does not have in their formula spaces for vocational ed and other um programs which we offer. So they provide you square footage of classrooms at 900 square f foot. In

049the formula we will be asking for additional square foot for career and technical education classes and a little bit of extra athletic space. Also the pool would be a separate ask. So what I've done here with the architects who have done a wonderful job on this a new conquered in today's numbers is roughly 135 million. This is to get in line. Now over the next year we will continue to develop this. If I have to come back to the board next year which I fully intend I will have to. This number may seem a little different. We're going to dive into this to see if some of the career and technical parts of this ask can be included in the state portion. But Conquer's at is is one of those buildings that like Lancashar we

050replaced. It was the right decision. Like Hamby, we replaced. And Conquer's getting to the point that in the cycle, it was renovated in 2003. Here we are 23 years, 22 years out. By the time we get to this, we'll be close to possibly 30 years out. And it's just a good business decision to build a new school. Now, in the report, we have to show something. When you submit the CNS, this is not the time you pick the color of the drapes. But if we were to get the athletic fields, we would certainly not build the athletic fields, where we would build a new conquered. We would think of all that, but over the next years, we will develop this a little further, figure out where we would build the school on site. It would

051most likely be a three-story school to keep the footprint small. But we've looked at the site. There are at least three locations where we could do it. we could educate the kids in the current building, build a new one, move them next door, take it down just like we did at Lancashire. So, this is the full certificate of necessity. I'm looking for board approval so I can take this to the Department of Education. Thank you for your time. >> Thank you. And then just so I can uh confirm it for the benefit of those listening. So, this is a manystep process, correct? So, the the very first step is submitting these to the state, which is going to take years. And then if they hypothetically approve a project, it would come back to the board

052and right and you would present so for this approved project with this much money we can do X with this much money we can do Y and then the board would choose an option and then the voters would have to approve the project as the third step. >> The board can choose a lesser scope, a lesser number. Hey, we can never go higher, but you know, as I said, if we're able to find grant money for one of these playgrounds in the next year or so, that comes off. If there are things we're able to figure out on the athletic field with either um donations or other grants we could get for um let's say dugouts or anything, those projects can come off. So, absolutely. But this is um this is the first step and

053the conquered is is is basically asking to get in line. This this is going to go on for a long long time. >> Any other questions? >> Mr. Reed, are you aware of any other schools in the state that have a roof older than Mount Pleasant Elementary? >> No, I'm not. Um there are a couple schools that are older, but they don't have the slate roofs. slate will last a hundred years, but the nails did not. And uh thank goodness for M to Mick. She's not here tonight, but she used her drone and we did a roof inspection. We found some parts of the roof, which we can fix, but we're going to have to get up here with a high reach. Why kids are here, 60ft high reach to go up there and safely

054hit those areas. But yeah, we're we're it's an old roof. It's time. >> Any other questions? Does anyone have a motion to submit the certificates of necessity to the state? >> So moved. >> Second. >> All right. Mr. Acriman and Mr. Scorbot. Any other discussion? All in favor? >> I. >> Any opposed? All right. Motion carried. That moves us to actually Dr. pass. I believe we're taking next. [Music] >> You got a couple minute reprieve, Mr. Uh, so Dr. Hes, which is the new 9A on special education service providers. >> Good evening, President Heler, Vice President Scarbot, Superintendent Lawson, and members of the board. I am here this evening to seek your approval for a multi- vendor award in response to our 2000 or 20,000 2025 sorry request for proposal for the special education service

055providers. This recommendation follows the work of our RFP evaluation committee which reviewed this and scored the proposals in accordance with the published criteria which looked at the experience of the vendor, the staffing plan and job descriptions, the service delivery model, and their price. The district continues to face persistent shortage of certified special education teachers, related service providers, behavioral mental health professionals, and particularly programs that are serving our significant and complex needs, learners. The goal of this RFP is to ensure that we can secure qualified personnel in the following areas. Instructional and program staff, behavioral and mental health services, therapy and related services, paraprofessional nursing support. The approved vendors will be used to fill the vacancies when the district recruitment efforts are unsuccessful. Provide related services that are required by a student's IEP and 504 plan.

056fully staff self self-contained programs for our students with emotional disturbance and autism autism spectrum disorder and ensure a con uh continuity of services across our 16 schools and our specialized programs. The evaluation committee recommends awarding contracts to 29 vendors to provide comprehensive coverage across all of our service program categories. This ensures flexibility to mitigate the risk of staffing shortages. This multi-awward approach aligns with the Delaware Code title 296926 and past district practice. These contracts will be effective from August 25th through July 31st, 2026 with the option to renew two additional one-year periods. Approval of the recommended vendor list as eligible providers for the forthcoming contracts under this RFP allows the district to engage them as needed to meet student need and maintain compliance with federal and state mandates. I would be happy to answer any

057questions you might have. >> Sure. So, um I have two questions for us. So, from the weighted list, so it appears that there was 29 vendors that met the bid qualifications and nine who did not. Is that correct? Correct. Correct. >> And then I guess there's another way to phrase this. So you're asking we're we're essentially approving not a dollar amount but simply to add these vendors to an approved vendor list for lack of a better >> That is absolutely correct. >> Sorry. Okay. Any other questions? >> Are all of these vendors new to this process or have they had experience with us personally? >> 16 of these are returning vendors. >> So we increased by 13. And I guess are these vendors managed at the building level when they are kind of slotted in

058to fill a role or >> So we partner with the building leadership teams to um evaluate candidates and determine assignments. >> Any other questions? Is there a motion to approve the multi- vendor award to the 29 vendors? >> I'll make a motion to approve. >> Okay, >> Mr. Scorbot. >> Second, >> Mr. Nimmy. Any other questions? All in favor? >> I. >> Any opposed? Motion carries. That moves us to Mr. McCoy for the rest of the evening. Starting with 9B, the monthly financial report for July. Uh, good evening, Board President Heler, Superintendent Lawson, board members, and audience members. Uh, we're going to start with the monthly financial report for July 31st, 2025. There's not much to this report since it's only one month of activity, but I'll just touch on some highlights as we scroll

059through. So the first page, page one is the revenues. Uh state funds are preloaded at the beginning of the year. So our state and local revenue is already at 57.9% of the budget. And you will be seeing a presentation on this budget later. Can you read that screen? Okay. Um, so this the budget column that you see does not include the 1.7% that we had included in our previous tax warrant. Um, I just made the assumption that I would use the lowest numbers that we could possibly have and if an adjustment is needed, that will be in the final budget. On the next page, page two, uh, I just wanted to point out that there at the bottom of the page, the federal fund and other aid section, there's an esser line from last year

060that had an amount in it. This year, it is completely zeroed out. There's no more esser funding left. Um, and then at the very bottom, the reserve has been upped from $3.7 million to $4.1 million, which is roughly 5% of the current expense real estate tax. And that falls in line with board policy. And then looking at the expenditures on the next page, uh there's only one month of activity, so there's there's nothing really to talk about at this point. Um if you guys have any questions on any of these numbers, I know I'm kind of breezing through them. Um bless you. But feel free to stop me. Uh on page five, we have the prior year appropriation expenders. And these are encumbered expenses that have carried over from fiscal year 25 to 26. And

061we'll just continue to spend these throughout the year um based upon what they're encumbered for. And on page six, we have the cash flow analysis. So we only have one month of actual activity that is July. All the other months are projected. And the projected balance, which you'll see in the budget presentation, is at $ 8.4 million. So that is less than the benchmark of $ 8.8 million. Um, but I am optimistic that will land closer to 8.8. I was conservative with some of our our revenue numbers in the preliminary budget. Um, and as those numbers are finalized in the final budget, I'm hoping things will align with the $ 8.8 million. Um, unless there's any questions on that report, that that is it. >> And did the district finance committee already review this? >>

062Sorry, the district finance finance committee did review it and approve it. >> Any questions? Okay. Motion to approve the July 31st, 2025 financial report. >> So moved. >> Second. >> Mr. Acriman and Miss Stock. All in favor? >> I. >> Any opposed? Motion carries. item C the August 1st financial position report. >> So this is the financial position report and this is a state required report which the purpose is to make sure that we have enough local funds on hand as of October 15th to be able to cover our payroll obligations throughout the summer. Uh so the division 2 three cash those are all pretty much wiped out um as we as we receive them. We know that we'll spend them all. So, we just zero them out and we focus solely on the local

063amounts that we have here. So, our projected balance is 7.4 million. Our projected one-mon local payroll is 5.1 million. So, we are comfortably uh able to cover our payroll obligations. And this report is something that is taking on a lot more scrutiny as um some districts have been in some hot waters recently. So, this was also approved by the district finance committee. >> Um, I do have a question on this one because in theory that five and $7 million are pretty close together. How is um the new ability for tax payments to be staggered throughout the year going to impact this? I feel like it would be easy to be $2 million short and then not be able to make payroll. >> Uh, the the vast majority of our tax revenues are after this report.

064So, they're not even really factored into this report. This is pretty much our local balance from the end of last year plus the tax revenues that we've already received um may get us to $7.4 million. >> Okay. Any other questions? Motion to accept the August 1st financial position report. >> So moved. >> Second. >> All right. Mr. Mr. Scarbat and Mr. Najimi. All in favor? >> I. >> Any opposed? Motion carries. And now the 2526 preliminary budget. All right. The 2526 preliminary budget. Um, I did put together a PowerPoint which is a very summarized version of the preliminary budget and you can find the 2526 detail detailed version of the preliminary budget on board docs or on the uh board meeting agenda. So, I figured that we should start with looking at last year's results

065to kind of understand some of the reasonings behind why we we why I put money in certain operating units or why revenues are expected to be where they land. Uh so, this is the 20 2425 revenue results. Uh we had $7 million over what we budgeted in revenues. A lot of that was due to the state excess um when of the state funding salaries and other employee compensation benefits. Uh local excess is due to interest income which was $667,000 more than the budget. Tax receipts were $300,000 more than budgeted. That's due to delinquent tax payments that come in throughout the year. And pool and facility rental was $18,000 more than budgeted. Uh the reasoning for that I believe it's just the the budget number was a little lower than where it should have been. Moving

066on to 2425 expenditure results and feel free to stop me at any time if you have questions. So we spent $5.8 million less than what we had budgeted. Um a large portion of that was due to federal and that is because our federal funds are spent over multiple years. Um, so we it was budgeted that we would spend the whole aotment, but really we only spent $5.2 million of our federal funding. Some items of note that we've touched on throughout the the previous fiscal year's board reports, um, student services, student support services, utilities, special education, tuition tax expenditures were all over budget. However, our total expenditures remained under budget. and putting the actual results together, the actual revenues and the actual expenditures, we were in the positive of $10.6 million. Um, with a caveat, as

067of June 30th, 2025, 6.7 million of that 10.6 million was already encumbered. So, it was already set aside for purchases that had yet to happen or were in the process of happening. So after all of that, our local fund balance increased by $332,000. Uh a little lower than we anticipated, but it was still positive results um in the face of some over expenditures that were that will now be covered by the second year of our referendum. With that said, we can move on to 2526 numbers. So these are the projected revenues. uh I have the 2526 budget, the 2425 budget and the change and the percent change. This is a a highle snapshot. We'll look at some details after this. Um so uh you can from the previous slides recall that we were $7 million

068over budget in revenues for 2425. So this $15 million change is not as drastic as it looks when you compare budget to budget. The next slide are some local revenue highlights. The first one is real estate tax. Um so it shows that we have $7.2 million increase. That is when you look at our projected number versus the budget number. Uh for purposes of our resetting of the tax rate, we had to base it off actual. So when you compare actual to projected, the difference between those two numbers is ties directly back to our excuse me, projected referendum income. Interest income. Uh you can see in the prior year we received $2.8 million, but I've only budgeted for 2.1. I'm trying to be conservative with that because you never know when the interest rates will start

069going down. Also, we have our delayed tax payments due to some legislation that passed. So, we won't be able to incur interest while while our our balance is the highest. So, I kept that lower. It's also in my mind better to keep it low because the interest rates can always go down in the and in the future you you don't want to have a hole when the interest rates start going down. Uh the choice line, I was very conservative with this to start. Uh we'll have a better picture of that when we pass the final budget in December. the nutrition line. So that one the actual was 5.1 um in 2425 but it was budgeted for 5.9 and I projected at 6.2 two um because the the nutrition the director of nutrition is doing a

070great job better utilizing some of the reimbursement rates for both state and fund federal revenues and and she has new ideas and she's implementing new plans to really increase the revenue. though there was an uh increase of $1.1 million over the prior year which I think is is could be too low hopefully. Charger I kept that relatively level and that's another another line item where we'll have a better picture when we have final numbers in December. But the main driver of our local revenues is that that referendum. On the next slide, we have some state revenue highlights. Uh the personnel lines and the transportation lines are both driven by uh the amount of money that we received to reimburse us to cover salaries. Unique alternatives. I adjusted that downwards just to align with uh historical

071revenues. the substitute block grant. That was money that was received for Harland for substitutes. Um they did not meet the criteria this year, which the criteria is you have to be at a lowinccome population of 50% or more and they were at 49.07%. So they did not meet that criteria. Um hopefully we can utilize the WLC to help us out with that lack of funding. Now, opportunity grant that has had some larger increases in previous years. I think we're maybe maxed out on that. So, that has remained fairly level with where it was in the prior year. Safety and security, that has a small increase. I included that mostly because uh we'll talk about it more on the expenditure side of things. And the related services number, that's when we cash in related service units.

072uh it's used for special education contractors and services. Um that is a number that we'll also have a better picture of come December. >> Mr. McCoy, what's the source of the low income determination and is there anything to challenge that figure or >> um I don't know the source of it. Um, but I can definitely look into it if we have any leeway to >> because yeah, if we're that close and we missed it, I'd be curious to as to the accuracy of the numbers. >> We did double check and they confirmed that is not a recipient. All right, on the next slide, we done with slides. Sorry, just >> All right. So, this slide has the operating revenues by source. Um, this was something I mimicked from previous preliminary budget presentations. Um and it

073shows that we're receiving less and less less and less of our revenues are coming from state slowly. Last year the state portion was 58% now it's at 56.4%. Uh the real estate tax that's at 39% last year was 38%. So it seems like the state is funding us funding us a little bit less and less and we have to rely on our residents a little more and more. On the next slide, we have the 2526 budget expenditures by source. So this compares the 2526 budget to the 2425 budget. Again, it's just a a very high level snapshot with some more details to come on the next page. the federal line shows a decrease on the expenditure side of things and that is because um like I mentioned before we don't spend the entire amount of

074federal funds that we receive in the year. So I I've pushed it down a little closer to what we actually spend in the year to give us a more realistic picture. >> On the next slide we have some of the notable expenditure changes. >> Excuse you Mr. question. Y >> I was just wondering why we we don't spend the federal money that we get. >> Mhm. So it it has continuously over overlapped years. So the start of this year we're spending what's left from the prior year and then it just continues and continues and continues. Um it's there are certain restrictions on spending it. So it does sometimes get a little difficult to fit that all into one year. So, we spread it out over a couple fiscal years. >> And Mr. Lavoy, it's an

075October to October grant. And so, it's a late starter as opposed to a fiscal year. And so, the overlap just happens year-over-year. But please, we spend it. We don't give any back. We use it all. Absolutely. >> Thank you. >> All right. So, there's a lot of numbers on this slide. Uh the first the first two lines are the salary lines. The state line that expenditure that's pretty much cover well that is covered with state funds as they help us cover salaries. The local line is a 2.5% increase over the prior year actual and that's to account for um local wage increases. student support services. That budget line, we've talked about this many times, absorbed a lot of the esser costs and this addition should make up the operating unit whole for 2526 operations in

076utilities that was due to um basically increased energy costs and increased energy usage. Um, and we're work I'm working with the director of facilities to see what plans we can implement to limit the utility usage going forward. Uh, transportation that has a $432,000 increase. That is mainly salaries that's covered by state funding. Safety and security, that is a a fairly large increase. $85,000 of that increase was money that was moved from another budget line into the safety and security budget line. Uh and the referendum, one of the selling points was that a large portion of the money would go to safety and security. So I know there's a lot of things that we need to accomplish. So there was um some extra money added to that operating unit. the special education tuition tax line. Uh

077that was increased to cover overages. Um it also includes $250,000 from the shift of our tax rates from debt service to tuition tax. And I am hopeful that the RFP that you guys just approved will have a positive impact on some of the costs that we were seeing in the special education tuition tax line. minor cap improvements. That is all covered by a shift of the tax rates from debt service to minor cap. $250,000 to be exact. We'll cover that. And child nutrition, that is an increase from the prior year budget, but it's a decrease from prior year actual. And that again is because the director of nutrition is doing a great job to find ways to cut costs and evaluate all the key performance indicators of a nutrition program to make sure that their

078program is where it needs to be financially. So putting that all together on the next slide, it's uh still broken out in state, local, and federal. the state. At the end of the year, we should have a balance remaining of $500,000. Local 1.4 million and federal 1.5. The local balance from last year that we carried into this year, 6.9, and that gets us to 8.4, which you saw on the uh cash flow statement from the July financial report. So, that is not 8.8, But um again, this is a very conservative budget from a revenue standpoint and the hope is that we'll end up closer to the 8.8 or above the 8.8 and the final budget will come to the board in December with more exact figures. Um the preliminary budget was approved by the district

079finance committee at our meeting last week. Any questions for Mr. McCoy? >> So, was there any discussion at the finance committee regarding the every year when we look at local revenue, there's kind of an anticipated delinquency rate. Is any discussion that the delinquencies might be increased this year given the assessments and the increases uh affecting households? >> That was not discussed at the finance committee meeting. >> We don't really have any I guess past data to track how this is going to affect things. So I mean it seems reasonable. I think we've always been conservative with that number in the anticipated collections. I don't think we always hit that delinquency number. So hopefully there won't be that that much of an impact. And to Mr. Heler's earlier point, how any kind of graduated payments will

080will affect. Thank you. Yeah. >> Any other questions? Is there a motion to approve the preliminary budget for 2526? >> So move subject to audit. >> Second, >> Mr. Acriman and Mr. Lavoy. All in favor? >> I. >> Any oppose? Motion carries. And the moment we've been waiting for, I think the tax warrant update. >> All right, the big ticket item. So, since we have approved, since we previously approved our tax rate, there have been some big changes. Um, on our first slide, slide two, I guess. We're just going to review some of the new legislation that has passed that is the reason for us discussing this topic. House Bill 242 allows Newcastle County school districts to reset their 2526 tax rate. It allows Newcastle County school districts to split their tax rate between residential

081and non-residential. The non-residential rate may not be more than two times the residential rate and it also extends the payment deadline till to November 30th, 2025. Uh there's also a caveat that districts can borrow from their division one funds that are provided by the state in the event that they face a cash shortfall. Um, but Newcastle County should be collecting our tax payments along the way and they should be sending us those tax revenues along the way and a little over 50% of the real estate tax payments in the county are paid through mortgage companies. Um, so I don't I don't know that those payments will be delayed. So I still think we'll get a large chunk of our tax revenue with this within the same time frame that we have in previous years. On

082the next slide, we have some additional bills that passed. House Bill 241 that set in place an installment payment plan for those who experienced a tax increase greater than $300. House Bill 240 requires the county to issue a refund to a taxpayer for an overpayment of $50 or greater. And I do think the taxpayer is going to have to um fill out some paperwork in order to get that refund rather than a credit on their next year tax bill. And then Senate Resolution 122 calls for a comprehensive review of Delaware's property tax reassessment to ensure future reassessments are improved. I should also note that the the school district, Brandy Wine School District, as well as the other Newcastle County school districts really tried to push for an increase on the income thresholds for the senior

083tax exemption. However, that bill did not make it to the floor to be voted on. We also floated the idea of increasing this the senior tax credit from 500 to $1,000, but because the state's budget was already passed, they could not um accommodate that request because it would have cost them twice as much money for the senior tax credit. All right, now into the the good stuff. the tax rate reset. So, the district's original 2025 2026 tax rate included 1.7% of the 10% revenue allowance after a reassessment. The intent was to provide provide Brandy Wine with $1.2 million to offset the loss of federal funding. Uh, of course, almost immediately after we uh approved after the board approved that, the federal government said you can have your federal funds that we were withholding. So, um,

084with this process, we have the ability to remove that 1.7% increase from our tax rate. Um, and it was my recommendation and the district's finance committee's recommendation that we remove the 1.7% increase from the tax rate during this process. So, all of the numbers that you will see going forward have the 1.7% removed. So, on the next slide, um, it has a breakdown of what actually is residential versus non-residential. Residential parcels consist of anything classified as residential or classified as farm. Non-residentidential is apartments, commercial, industrial, and utilities. Uh apartments being anything that has four or more units. So, this uh aligns with a methodology used by Newcastle County and will align with the methodology used by most hopefully all of the Newcastle County districts. And Newcastle County themselves strongly suggested that districts follow these guidelines

085to avoid uniformity issues and to prevent the classifications getting jumbled up in billing processes. All right, on the next slide, just a little uh blurb about split rates. Split tax rates. So, the split tax rates will allow the district to redistribute tax burdens caused by the Newcastle County reassessment. It will let us shift some of the tax burden that originally fell on residential properties back to non-residential properties. So all residential parcels will see some sort of release relief. We have 32,000 residential parcels. The relief will limit but it will not erase the additional tax burden from the Newcastle County reassessment. Yes. >> With regards to that, is it a matter of overall tax burden or Brandy Wine School District related tax burden that you're discussing in that in that uh bullet? >> This is all

086specific to Brandy Wine School District. So, um, it was also a hot topic about who or what properties were receiving residential declines in taxes and the the properties that received declines previously will have an even larger decline in their taxes if we split the rates. Non-residential parcels will see an increase in taxes. That is,300 parcels. Um, some of the non-residential parcels did experience a tax increase after the original tax rate was set. So after this process, they will see a incremental increase going forward. All right, on the next slide. So we talk a lot about the tax burden and this this slide shows what the tax burden actually is. So the tax burden represents the percent of taxes each property class pays. So if we look at residential, excuse me, before the reassessment on the

087right side, their col the column says that they said they their tax burden was 67.35%. After the reassessment, the residential tax burden was 79.30%. Commercial before reassessment was 21. After reassessment was 13%. So those are pretty large percentages. And when you look at the dollar amounts, it's it's even more staggering. Um, yeah. So, the total residential burden before the reassessment when you include residential and farm was 67.38%. So, then we have to figure out what tax rates will put us back at those tax burdens that existed prior to the reassessment. So to do that, we took the receipts, the revenue neutral tax receipts, the $97 million, times the fiscal year 25 tax burden to realize how much in tax revenue the residential class needs to generate. Then we divide the receipts by the total assessment

088for the class and we multiply it by 100 and you can figure out your new revenue neutral rate. For residential, it's 0.5233 and for non-residential, it's 9687. The next step on the next slide is to figure out what are the split rates to add in our referendum. So, we do the same process. We know that we need to generate 6.979 million in revenue. 67% of that needs to come from our residential classification. 32% of that needs to come from our non-residential classification. So we can calculate how much each class needs to generate, figure out the tax rate to generate that amount, and you can see what we need for residential 0376 and for non-residential 0695. Adding those two together on the next slide. >> So Mr. McCoy, just hang on. We're a little bit behind.

089Yeah. Could could you uh just I'm sorry but we were a little bit behind so just explain the step one and the step two again. >> So step one we know that our tax revenues in fiscal year 25 were 97.238 million. We know that in fiscal year 25 the tax burden for the residential class was 67.37. So at that revenue at that tax burden they generate a tax revenue of $65 million. When you divide the receipts by the total assessment of the class and you multiply it by 100, you can come to the tax rate that's needed to generate that level of revenue for that class. And for residential it was 0.5233 and for non-residential it was 9687. So the next slide on step two is the same process but with our referendum revenues. So

090the 6.9 that's the amount that we projected we were would receive from the referendum when we passed the referendum two years ago times the tax burden. So residential properties need to generate $4.7 million of our referendum. And you do the equation again and that comes out to 0376 for residential and 0695 for non-residential. And on the next slide, we add the two pieces together to figure out the total rate. So the resident the new residential rate would be 0.5609. The new non-residential rate would be 1.0382. That makes our non-resident residential rate 1.85 times higher than the residential rate which is in within the legislation cap of two times higher. On the next slide, we look at how those new rates play out for our split rate tax burden. So you have the same thing that

091we had on the previous slide, the before reassessment amounts and the before reassessment tax burdens. And then you have the same thing with the split rates on the right side and the tax burden that the split rates generate. So you can see residential 67.35, it went to 67.36, but it's because all these large numbers and the decimals things kind of kind of round oddly. Um, and at the end of the day, the new the new rates generate us $14 million of revenue and that includes our referendum income and that agrees to in the previous presentation where we had option one which did not include any of the allowance which we'll see on the next slide. >> So Mr. McCoy yes and just so for this slide >> so just to emphasize what I was saying

092earlier. So in this scenario uh right once we split the rate and if we assuming we choose to vote to pull back that 1.7%. So the amount of tax revenue being generated now is the exact same amount that would have been generated this year had it not been for reassessment. >> Correct. Yep. The difference between the two numbers, the 97 million from last year and the 104 from this year, 6.987 is the referendum. All right. So, you can see that the split rates generate $14 million. On the next slide is a screenshot from my previous tax warrant presentation where we had recommendation one, which was the neutral rate plus a referendum, and we do not use any of the allowance. And you can see at the end of the day that resulted in $14 million,

093the same amount that we saw on the previous slide from our tax our split rates. Now we have um a couple examples on the next slide. So this is an example of how properties with the same assessed value can see vastly different results. the um current single rate assessed value. The assessed value that we have for the after reassessment numbers 385 922 that is the average household assessed value after the reassessment. So you can see um there's a couple examples. One the first one the home assessed value increased by 350%. The one to the right of that 450%. then so on and so forth. Uh you can see that the the 2025 2026 one rate compared to the 2025 2026 with the split rates every example has the same decrease of $46 regardless of the

094volume that your taxes went up. So in all cases the reduction from splitting the rate will be the same. Um in these examples the increase that is due to the second year of our referendum is $145. So for example when you look at that the home that went up $650%. Their 2526 tax rate change if we split the rates is $739. $145 of that is because of Brandy Wine School District. So there's an example on the next page of how residents can figure out what these split rates would save them. So this is a a screenshot of the tax bill on the Newcastle County parcel search. If you look up your parcel number, you click on your parcel number and then you click view history of tax bills at the top of the page, you

095can select the tax bill for that has already gone out for 2526. And you'll see on there a line for Brandy Wine School District. If you take that that number, the current amount, and you multiply that by 15.79%, it will calculate the decrease in your taxes. So in this example, the decrease is $419. And that's for residential only. Correct. >> This is residential only. >> All right. On the next slide, a lot of the phone calls that I received and even some questions from the finance committee, people didn't really understand how any of this could be revenue neutral. So, I'm I've tried to show real life examples of how this has been revenue neutral plus the referendum for Brandy Wine School District. So, these are all residential examples. I I I chose um these are

096actual values from the Newcastle County tax parcel file that they send us. And you can see the increases go from 120% to 1,343%. So the lower your assessment was before the reassessment, the worse off you likely are after reassessment because you likely increased a percentage over our average. And if you look at line five, that one increased 394%. That's pretty much our average between 393 and 394. So, if you're over 393.5, you're likely going to see an increase even after we split the rates. Um, so I just wanted to compare line one to line 10. In line one, they're and line 10 after the assessment. They both have very similar values. However, they're both seeing very different results because of the reassessment. In line one, because they only increased 120%, they are benefiting from the

097reassessment. So, their taxes actually went down $1,600. In line 10, since their assessed value jumped up dramatically, they are paying more in taxes. And if you look at the split rate tax column, the second from the right, they're actually paying a very similar amount. So the the previously lower assessed home is just now catching up to what the previously higher assessed home was paying. Uh so I kept those all all on this slide because they had similar new assessed values. On the next slide I I went with the higherend assessed values and you can see it's the same story playing over again. Um so from the first slide, the previous slide to this slide, um those 20 examples, the net change overall in taxes paid to Brandy Wine is $52. So you can see people,

098some homes are paying $3,600 less, some homes are paying $2,300 more. It all nets together and at the end of the day, um Brandy Wine School District's rate is revenue neutral plus our referendum. Mr. McLean, I just want to say thank you because the the two slides that you have, tax burden shifts, show what a realer told me. And the realer told me that Tyler Technologies overvalued the lower-end homes and undervalued the higherend homes. And your two slides point that out quite clearly. So, I I applaud the Senate for passing a resolution to look into this process because it's fundamentally flawed. Um, I'm hoping that there's some way to fix it moving forward. I'm glad that we're doing the things that we're doing. I I I support the recommendation. Uh, but Tyler Technologies did a

099really bad job with this assessment in my opinion. >> Thanks. So on the next slide, we also need to consider the non-residential impact of splitting our tax rate. The non-residential statistics with a a rate of 1.0382 are as follows. There's 394 parcels that will have a tax decrease, still have a tax decrease from their 2425 tax burden tax bill. The average decrease is $13,821. Tax decreases range from less than a dollar to as much as $453,000. So even after we split our tax rates, there are parcels in the non-residential category that will still see high six figure decreases in their taxes. There will be 934 parcels that will have a tax increase from 2425. The average increase is $11,000. The increases range from less than $8 to as much as $611,000. Uh the average assessed

100value of the top 50 increases is $23 million. So a lot of the larger increases that we're seeing are on the larger valued properties. And I I tried to highlight that on the next slide. Uh where I I split out the commercial and the apartment parcels. I grouped them by assessed values to show what the average increase is for that level of assessed value. Um, so the district finance committee was split on how they wanted to wording split the tax rates and I think that was because I did not provide them with enough data on commercial and apartment parcels. So I wanted to put this out here so you guys can see what the actual impact is to the different levels of businesses and apartments. So for the apartments, those valued at $20 million or

101more, they have an average tax change of $137,000. So their taxes will increase $137,000. Of the top five, three of them are currently under appeal. So they're trying to reduce their assessed value. Uh I I think the point of this was to show that this is It's not ideal to put taxes back on anyone. Um, but it is likely the larger properties that are seeing the tax increase. So, we would hope that those are the properties that can easier more easily um take on the tax increase. Of course, there's going to be outliers within the groups, but as a whole, I think this this slide does a good job of conveying the impact to the different levels of commercial parcels and apartment parcels. >> Mr. McCoy, you mentioned that uh some of the top five

102are three of them are under appeal. Is that because they got the appeal in before the deadline? >> Yes. >> Can you comment at all about residents now who what right they have to appeal their appraisal? I don't think that they would be able to appeal for this tax bill. I believe that window has closed and I don't know that it they're opening it back up, but they can appeal for next year's taxes at any time. There is a deadline. I take that back. Not at any time. There is a deadline. I think it might be April. >> Thank you. >> Yep. So on the next slide, we have another option for splitting the rates. Now just because I presented the 1.85 times option doesn't mean that's our only option. Newcastle County split their tax

103rate at 1.5 times. That would be an option for us or any any split in between below 1.5 above 1.5. Um, but if we were to limit the non-residential rate to 1.5 times the residential rate, our new rates would be as you see here. So residential would be.5964 and non-residential 8944. That would mean that the tax burden would slightly shift back to residential and it would now be 71.81% whereas it was 67%. the increase. >> Oh, sorry. >> Y >> So, is the 1.5 kind of arbitrary? I mean, in your last example, I liked how you're following the percentage of what it was prior to the reassessment. So, is there any methodology between 1.5 or any other number? >> I I don't know where how Newcastle County landed on 1.5. From what I've heard, they

104did the calculation to see where they needed to be to shift the burden back and it landed on 1.5. So, they drew up the ordinance to be 1.5. >> Okay. I appreciate the work that you did on the prior slide to keep it consistent with prior years in that in that shift. Thank you. >> Thank you. So if we did went 1 1.5 the decrease to residential bills would be approximately 10.51% as opposed to the 15.79 that we saw in earlier slides and the increase to non-residential bills would be approximately 34%. All right on the last slide here just some final thoughts. The district finance committee is in support of removing the 1.7% of additional tax that was included in our original 2025 2026 tax warrant. The district finance committee could not reach a consensus

105on what level to split the tax rates 1.85 versus 1.5. Um and again I believe some of that was due to the fact that I presented more more data here than was presented to them at the time. And one of their big hesitations was they did not have the data to make a decision. >> So could I jump in there? So even if they didn't reach a consensus on how to split it, they were was there a consensus on that it should be split? >> Yes. >> Thank you. >> Surrounding Newcastle County districts are heading towards splitting the tax rates in a way to return the burden to levels pre- reassessment. So that would be the 1.85 for us. And it's my recommendation that Brandy Wine School District split the rates at 1.85 times to

106return the tax burdens to prior levels and provide relief to 32,000 residential parcels and remain uniform with the surrounding districts. And that is it. >> Any question? >> Um I'd love to hear everybody's questions. I'll I'll share my opinion. Um I think like I said earlier that there's not a perfect answer, right? So whatever we do is going to impact somebody negatively. And my my fear I guess is as a former small business owner who depended on that to survive it the the chance that some of this impact is going to you know really hurt uh small businesses in the community as a concern. But at the same time I think our overall obligation is to do the most good for the most amount of people. Um and I believe the 1.8 8 split makes

107sense in that case. love to hear everybody else's. I guess that would be my question is is what impact do we know an impact on small businesses or or what constitutes small business or >> that's kind of why I tried to break it out by assessed value thinking that the small businesses might be in the lower assessed ranges and those increases weren't um well they weren't awful but I'm not that small business so I any increase is awful. But I also looked at some of some of the um larger valued non-residential parcels and when I looked them up on the parcel search, they were a strip mall on Marsh Road that had about six properties and their taxes went up $10,000. So it would be $10,000 split amongst all of the businesses in that little

108stretch. So, I'm I'm sure there are some businesses out there that had a a they were kind of sliding by with a low assessed value. This brought that to light, jumped their assessed value up, so their percentage is higher than the rest of the group. So, they might take a hit, but it's hard to say. >> And the numbers on the residential versus the nonresidential or commercial was 1300 parcels. >> Yes. were were the nonresial. Yes. >> You know, kind of going back and thinking about that as well. you know, if small businesses, you know, trying to justify this in some way, are relying on the members of our communities to support their business, either the higher tax burden on the residential, they don't have the money to spend at small businesses versus, which I'll

109say, you know, given the outcome of the reassessments, you know, to I think it's hard to argue with shifting it back to the pre-assessment balance. Um, and I kind of, you know, along with Mr. Hower, I think the the greater good is to is to split it along those lines that it was prior and kind of, you know, I think that's the best way to justify it. >> Have we had any payments of tax obligations from the prior tax u establishment? Has anybody paid that? >> Yes. >> So, are h how much of how many of them are going to have to get paid back and how quickly are we going to have to calculate that? >> That would all be done by Newcastle County. So, they collect our payments >> and they're also going

110to send out new bills that have an adjusted um amount and they are going to have to reconcile how much people have already paid versus what their new bill is. And lastly, do we based on the law and the uh the presentation um for the the ability to delay into three separate payments anything over $300. Is that for residential or is that for any entity paying taxes? >> Uh the bill says residential specifically. >> Okay. And then this I just want to clarify that um sorry I guess my I just want to clarify because I know that last month when we talked about potentially splitting the tax rate. I know that the recommendation was to not do that because of the danger of basically uh corporations um basically suing. Is that right? So, I just

111want to clarify. >> Mhm. >> Do we still have that danger of the school district getting sued or is this now because of the special session that we don't have that danger? >> Can I jump? I My understanding, right, is that the reason we couldn't do it last time is because it was illegal, >> right? >> Or that it could be potentially illegal. >> And now >> there's still always the chance that Some someone could sue us. >> Got it. >> Or the county. They would likely not come specifically after us because we did not change the rules to split the rate. >> Clarification. And by removing the 1.7% for lack of federal funds that we had anticipated, are we the only district in Newcastle County that has not used any part of that 10%

112buffer? >> Um, Red Clay is likely to remove their 1%. So, they would also be revenue neutral. >> Okay. >> Yeah, >> I think that's it. >> Thank you. >> We're the first district to meet since the uh special session. >> Say again. We're the first district in Newcastle County to have a meeting since the special session. So, we're setting the tone here. >> Are we ready for a motion? >> Sure. >> I was so I guess in thinking about making a motion from a logistical standpoint. Do we need to address the federal funds piece separately from the split rate or >> I think that we should vote to rem remove the federal fund. >> Isn't that part of the recommendation, Mr. Scoba? >> What's that? >> We're we're voting to accept the recommendation. I

113believe that was part of the recommendation. >> So So the recommendation is together the 1.7 removal of federal funds plus the split rate at 185. It's not two recommendations, it's one recommendation. >> It could be one. >> I'll make a motion to um to remove the 1.7 increase of the federal due to the federal funds. Um the 1.7 increase >> as a separate item, >> but you're splitting it now, Mr. Scr. >> Yeah. So So the motion is >> I think it's cleaner >> to remove the 1.7% increase that we took on the initial tax warrant. Is there a second? >> Second. >> Okay. Second. Any other discussion on that? All in favor? >> I. >> Any opposed? Any abstensions? Motion carried. Is there a motion for the second part of the recommendation? >> So

114moved. >> So that is a motion to split the rate >> 1.85 >> between >> Mr. Acri >> between residential non-residential. >> Second. >> Is there a second? All right. Mr. Scrobot second. Any discussion? All in favor? >> I. >> Any opposed? Any abstensions? >> Motion carried. Thank you, Mr. McCoy. Um, with that general information, um, we are going to try over the next couple of meetings to move meetings around the community. Um, so our next regular board meeting will be September 15th at PS Dupant. I should have mentioned there'll be a workshop September 4th um here at Mount Pleasant Elementary. The next regular board meeting will be September 15th at PS DuPont and then there's tentatively a workshop for October 6th back at Mount Pleasant Elementary. >> Will that will that be in the

115auditorium or the library at PS >> auditorium? Auditorium at PS. >> Thank you. >> Any other items? Motion to adjurnn. >> So moved. >> Second. And we are adjourned at 8:50.