New Castle County council approves temporary penalty-abatement plan for reassessment-related tax increases

New Castle County Council voted Aug. 5 to approve Ordinance 25-099, a measure that gives the county chief financial officer authority to abate penalties for eligible residential taxpayers who enroll in a three-installment payment plan after the countywide reassessment. The ordinance passed on a roll-call vote of 12-1.

The ordinance applies only to the county share of property tax, not school or city taxes, council members said. Councilman Cartier said the county’s portion is “about 20%” of a typical property tax bill and urged residents to work with state legislators on larger school-tax issues.

Acting Chief Financial Officer Dave Delgrande described how the county plans to implement the program. “As long as they meet our criteria of being in good standing, we would allow them to make three equivalent payments due Sept. 30, Dec. 31 and March 31,” Delgrande said. “At the end of that period, all penalty and interest would be wiped from the account related to this year’s tax bill.”

Council members and staff clarified that the arrangement is limited: taxpayers must qualify under the county’s criteria to participate, and missing a scheduled payment will remove the taxpayer from the arrangement and allow penalties and interest to resume. “If they miss a plan and miss a payment, then they would no longer be on a payment arrangement. So penalties and interest would be accumulated,” Delgrande said.

The adoption followed extensive public comment, during which homeowners and community advocates repeatedly said three payments would be insufficient for many low-income households. Rochelle Wilson of Make Some Intelligent Noise said the three-payment schedule would not work for many residents and warned of possible liens and displacement. “Three installment plans…that’s not gonna work. That’s going to put houses, people’s houses up for lien and possible displacements,” Wilson said.

Several other residents and community leaders urged broader relief or an independent reassessment process. Joe Walls, CEO of Veteran Services, called for means-testing for taxes. “These taxes need to be means tested. If you can’t pay, you shouldn’t be taxed,” Walls said.

Council members emphasized procedural context for the reassessment. Councilman Koneko noted the county had not conducted a reassessment for decades, and councilman Koneko and others said the current work followed a court-ordered reassessment and professional appraisal standards. Councilman Cartier and others pointed residents to appeal options and to the County Board of Assessment Review for property-assessment disputes.

Roll call on Ordinance 25-099 recorded 12 yes votes and one no. The council recorded yes votes from Kaneko, Carter, Cartier, Durham, George, Hollins, Kilpatrick, Sheldon, Smiley, Street, Tackett and Toole. Williams Johns voted no. The clerk announced, “25-099 has been approved.”

The council read several other ordinances into the record for introduction and scheduling at the regular Aug. 26 meeting, including an administrative rezoning, a data-center standards ordinance and a technical budget amendment related to police retirement funding; those items were introduced but not considered for final action at this special meeting.

County staff and the council said they will provide contact information and follow-up to members of the public who asked questions during the meeting. The council repeatedly told residents they will receive email responses to outstanding questions and that additional details about eligibility and outreach will be circulated by the executive office and county press channels.