EDITORIAL: School funding mechanism needs some thought

May 7, 2024 |By Katie Tabeling

Voted sticker stock — PHOTO COURTESY OF UNSPLASH / ELEMENT 5 DIGITAL

Already a subscriber? Log in

To continue reading this article ...

Subscribe to Delaware Business Times right now and get access to subscriber-only content like this article.

- Advertisement -

Plus get 24 issues of DBT via print or digital, special bonus issues, and discounted registration for our in-person events.

Learn More and Subscribe Today

– Digital Partners -

[caption id="attachment_227707" align="aligncenter" width="1024"]

School referendums to raise operational and capital funding is a unique model in the nation. Delaware is one of the few which use it. | PHOTO COURTESY OF UNSPLASH / ELEMENT 5 DIGITAL[/caption] For the first time since I moved to the Appoquinimink School District, I saw signs telling people to vote against the referendum, including signs that read “Vote No for a Tax Increase.” Apparently, a yard sign one of my neighbors had in support of the referendum was defaced with a red marker that called it a scam. Appoquinimink School District is one of the most famed in the state of Delaware and it’s one of two major draws for people to move their families to the area. In fact, it’s why we decided to move there. But looking at the sheer times the district has had to hold the ballots asking voters to decide on a tax increase is a message in itself about the growth there. In 1995, the district had 3,200 students in four schools. Today, it’s estimated at 12,945 students across 18 schools — and still growing. District officials believe that 200 to 450 new students are added each year. Referendums can be tricky little things. It’s putting a direct question to the voters. I’ve been in towns where unionization of fire departments was put to a referendum ballot. I’ve seen historic posters asking Baltimore people to vote no against bonds in 1945 — “Vote no to new debt!” But in Delaware, we’re part of an elite few states that require the school districts to get the voters to decide on raising that money for operating and capital budgets. In other words, to vote to raise taxes. Appoquinimink School District’s February referendum failed with roughly 6,200 people voting in total on three different measures. The first question asked to raise taxes 43 cents per $100 of an assessed property value for operating costs, including teacher salaries. The second asked to raise taxes by 3 cents per $100 of assessed property value to build three additional schools. The final one asked to raise taxes a cent per $100 of assessed property value for safety measures and a bus. This time, on April 23, the bus lot was scrapped and voters were asked to raise taxes 39 cents per $100 of assessed value for operating expenses and 3 cents per $100 for building three schools. The bus lot was scrapped. Turnout was historic with about 13,000 voters who turned out to the polls. When I ordered coffee before I headed to the ballot myself last week, my barista told me that there was a lot of misinformation out there. I, in turn, asked her if she thought it was a little strange that every time the school district needed more funding, they needed to force that question on the people? Delaware public school funding is set with state and federal contributions, but a local share is also determined. In Maryland, that local share is set from the county government, so the property tax rate there already is factored in to handle that expense. Maryland also reassesses its property on a constant basis, with a third of the property in a county reassessed each year. Here in the Appoquinimink School District, we have already been set behind from years of delaying property reassessment. It’s pretty clear that the revenue generated from taxes probably isn’t enough to sustain the explosive growth it’s been drawing in. New Castle County has not adjusted its property tax valuations since 1983 — in other words, about a decade before I was born. In my years as a local government reporter, I have seen city councils refuse to move from constant yield, or a calculated rate that would generate the same amount of revenue as previous years. Think of it as an inflation adjustment. That means the millions and millions of capital improvement projects had to be stretched out in undetermined ways. I’ve often been discouraged by low voter turnout in local elections. Just look at Milford, where the incumbents, including the mayor, were voted out. It was a close call, with the race decided with 100 votes. That represents 15% voter turnout which I’ve heard represents a historic event for the small town. In Appoquinimink, there’s 57,207 people who could vote in the referendum. So last week’s ballot represented 22% of the vote. But it’s hard to point a finger at disengaged residents as 13,000 voters represent a historic turn out for the district. If anything, for me, this election cycle shines a brighter light on the fact that we need more consistent reporting on our school boards, who do make most of the funding decisions, rather than when people are concerned about raising taxes. It’s difficult to ask people to make the choice to raise costs on themselves to invest in a future they can’t see yet, especially if their own children are grown. It’s time for stakeholders to consider how we can improve the funding mechanisms in place.