Delaware is taking a major step forward to overhaul Delaware’s public school funding formula that dates back to the 1940s through legislation set to be introduced next week.
Monday’s votes by the Public Education Funding Commission, chaired by Senate Education Committee state Sen. Laura Sturgeon, D-Brandywine Hundred, approved making a new hybrid formula into law.
Sturgeon and House Education Committee Chair state Rep. Kim Williams, D-Stanton, are sponsoring two bills. One is the formula revamp and the other extends the life of the commission.
Advocates of the blended funding formula approach argue it would preserve the foundation of the current unit-based system, while simplifying distribution and giving districts more flexibility in how the money is used. It would also include more weighted funding for low-income and multilingual learners.
The fiscal year 2027 cost to prepare for implementation is only $2.8 million. But the state will likely have come up with up to $200 million fiscal year 2028 to realize phase one. The numbers will be updated before phase one begins, which could increase or decrease the amount. The money would be used to hold all school districts harmless, protecting school districts from losing money if they have a lower population of disadvantaged students, while the new funding formula is put into place.
Delaware Education Secretary Cindy Marten said during Monday’s meeting that Gov. Matt Meyer has committed to putting the money into his next recommended budget to improve academic success for the state’s most disadvantaged kids.
The Sussex County Land Trust faced a multimillion-dollar problem in 2019.
The trust — a nonprofit charged with preserving open spaces in southern Delaware — sought to protect an 80-acre property near the Delaware beaches as a public trail and a working farm.
But the $8.5 million price tag — a discount from what housing developers could have offered — was a big lift for the small nonprofit.
“We had to get a bit scrappy,” said Sara Bluhm, executive director and the only full-time staff member of the Sussex County Land Trust.
On Tuesday, the Land Trust finally purchased the property after seven years of negotiating and piecing together federal, state, county and even private dollars.
The purchase means eastern Sussex County’s yearslong building boom will not spread to the property that sits southwest of Lewes and east of Route 1. Still, it will take years and even more funding for part of the land to open to the public.
Here’s something I did not know:
Unlike other Delaware counties, Sussex County does not have a dedicated parks department, so owning and maintaining preserved land is a complex collaboration between the county, the state, and nonprofits.
While that approach saves taxpayers money, Bluhm said it can be limiting because her organization can struggle to find the money to transform preserved land into something Sussex County residents can enjoy.
In addition to Bluhm, here’s the other true hero of this story:
Former landowner Linda Miller, though, calls the property “Ard na Gréine,” Irish Gaelic for “the rise that catches the sun,” because of its slight slope and views of beautiful sunsets.
Miller said she has received dozens of letters of interest from developers and solar companies looking to purchase the property. It is one of the largest tracts of land east of Route 1 that has not yet been developed.
“I could always tell, when the mail came addressed to me a certain way, that this was going to be somebody interested in purchasing the farm for development,” Miller said.
But she said she wouldn’t have found peace with herself if she let the land turn into yet another housing development or solar field.
“Having open space is, I think, important to everyone, especially as areas get more congested. People need a place of quiet and peace and tranquility,” Miller said.
The Justice Department has secured a two-count indictment against former FBI Director James Comey for threatening President Trump by posting a photo on social media.
This is the second time the Trump DOJ has gotten an indictment against Comey, a fierce critic and outspoken opponent of President Trump.
A grand jury handed up an indictment against Comey over a photo he posted online last year of seashells on a North Carolina beach arranged to say “8647” — 86 being old slang to mean “get rid of,” and 47 seen by some as a reference to Trump, who is the 47th (and 45th) president.
Comey “did knowingly and willfully make a threat to take the life of, and to inflict bodily harm upon, the President of the United States, in that he publicly posted a photograph on the internet social media site Instagram which depicted seashells arranged in a pattern making out “86 47″, which a reasonable recipient who is familiar with the circumstances would interpret as a serious expression of an intent to do harm to the President of the United States,” according to the indictment, which was unsealed on Tuesday and filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina.
Well, no reasonable person would interpret it as such, but let’s continue:
“Threatening the life of the president of the United States will never be tolerated by the Department of Justice,” Blanche said. He mentioned the DOJ has also prosecuted several other cases against people threatening Trump.
“While this case is unique and this indictment stands out because of the name of the defendant, his alleged conduct is the same kind of conduct that we will never tolerate and that we will always investigate and regularly prosecute,” Blanche said.
Todd? You can calm down now. You’ve got the job for as long as you want it.
The US’s top media watchdog announced on Tuesday that it is accelerating the review of eight local broadcasting licenses used by ABC, in a move critics see as a clear example of political and regulatory retribution against a disfavored broadcaster.
The Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) announcement comes after the White House launched a full-on attack against the ABC’s late-night host, Jimmy Kimmel, over a joke he made last week about Melania Trump.
The FCC – led by Trump-appointed chair Brendan Carr – does not grant licenses to national television networks; rather, it licenses each individual station that broadcasts using the public airwaves.
ABC owns and operates eight stations, though it has content agreements with many more. Those eight stations – WABC-TV New York, KABC-TV Los Angeles, WLS-TV Chicago, WPVI-TV Philadelphia, KTRK-TV Houston, KGO-TV San Francisco, WTVD-TV Raleigh-Durham and KFSN-TV Fresno – are the ones being targeted by Carr’s FCC.
Those stations were not scheduled to have to apply for renewal until 2028 at the earliest and 2031 at the latest. But now they are required to file for renewal by 28 May, years ahead of when they were originally required to do so. The FCC announcement appears connected to an investigation launched by the agency early last year into ABC parent company Disney’s diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) practices.
A remarkable thing has happened on the world’s battlefields. Ukraine — a nation that was supposed to dissolve within days of a Russian invasion — has fought Russia to a stalemate, revolutionizing land warfare in the process. It has become an indispensable security partner in the Western alliance, including in the war against Iran.
Now, Volodymyr Zelensky, Ukraine’s president, is taking the next step, one that would have been unthinkable even as recently as 2024. By word and deed, he’s showing Europe and the world how the post-American free world can preserve its liberty and independence. This is what happens when, as Phillips Payson O’Brien wrote in a piece for The Atlantic, “Kyiv appears to have given up on the United States.”
If that is true — and it looks as though it is — it may be worse news for the United States than it is for Ukraine.
Events on the ground and in world capitals are moving so quickly that it’s hard to keep up. First, the strategic situation in the Ukraine war seems to have changed. Last week, Mick Ryan, a retired Australian major general and one of the most astute analysts of the war, wrote that Ukraine has largely stabilized the frontline in eastern Ukraine, deepened its coalition, isolated Russia diplomatically and developed an indigenous arms industry that makes it less dependent on external support.
It’s no longer accurate to think of Ukraine as a desperate underdog; it’s becoming an independent power. Even as it fights for its life against Russia, it’s reportedly reaching defense deals with the Gulf states and with the United States — and this time it’s Ukraine that’s providing military assistance.
In February 2025, President Trump mocked Zelensky in the Oval Office. “You’re not in a good position. You don’t have the cards right now,” Trump said. In April 2026, Ukraine has enough cards left that it’s sharing them.
This might be difficult for many readers to grasp — given our nation’s longstanding military supremacy — but the largest and most battle-hardened land force in the Western world may well be the Ukrainian Army. While the precise numbers are classified, the Atlantic Council estimated in 2025 that Ukraine had roughly a million men and women under arms, the vast majority of whom serve in the ground forces.
blanche is a perfect example of whoever is in trumps admin now, there is always someone worse waiting in the wings.
I know the democrats have no ability to be a cohesive bunch but why dont they coordinate:
– these 10 dems talk daily about the epstein files
-these 10 dems talk daily about the lack of investigations in to all these ‘assassinations”
-these 10 dems talk daily about the higher and higher prices
– these 10 dems talk daily about the iran war
footlights on the whole stage will work better than one spotlight on a couple individuals
“The Supreme Court on Wednesday struck down Louisiana’s voting map, finding that lawmakers had illegally used race when drawing up a new majority-minority district.
The decision was 6-to-3, split along ideological lines. The conservative majority asserted that the opinion was a limited ruling that preserved a central tenet of the Voting Rights Act, but the court’s liberal wing, in dissent, argued that the justices had taken the final step to dismantle the landmark civil rights law.
In the majority opinion, Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. wrote that the court had kept intact the Voting Rights Act but that Louisiana lawmakers had violated the Constitution with “an unconstitutional gerrymander” by aiming to create a new district with a majority of Black voters.
Justice Elena Kagan, in dissent, countered that the practical effect of the decision would be to make it nearly impossible to use race when drawing up voting maps, writing that “the court’s decision will set back the foundational right Congress granted of racial equality in electoral opportunity.”
Justice Kagan read her dissent from the bench, a rare move that often signals a justice’s strong displeasure with a decision.”
blanche is a perfect example of whoever is in trumps admin now, there is always someone worse waiting in the wings.
I know the democrats have no ability to be a cohesive bunch but why dont they coordinate:
– these 10 dems talk daily about the epstein files
-these 10 dems talk daily about the lack of investigations in to all these ‘assassinations”
-these 10 dems talk daily about the higher and higher prices
– these 10 dems talk daily about the iran war
footlights on the whole stage will work better than one spotlight on a couple individuals
Supreme Court Guts Voting Rights Act. 6-3:
https://www.nytimes.com/live/2026/04/29/us/supreme-court-voting-rights
“The Supreme Court on Wednesday struck down Louisiana’s voting map, finding that lawmakers had illegally used race when drawing up a new majority-minority district.
The decision was 6-to-3, split along ideological lines. The conservative majority asserted that the opinion was a limited ruling that preserved a central tenet of the Voting Rights Act, but the court’s liberal wing, in dissent, argued that the justices had taken the final step to dismantle the landmark civil rights law.
In the majority opinion, Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. wrote that the court had kept intact the Voting Rights Act but that Louisiana lawmakers had violated the Constitution with “an unconstitutional gerrymander” by aiming to create a new district with a majority of Black voters.
Justice Elena Kagan, in dissent, countered that the practical effect of the decision would be to make it nearly impossible to use race when drawing up voting maps, writing that “the court’s decision will set back the foundational right Congress granted of racial equality in electoral opportunity.”
Justice Kagan read her dissent from the bench, a rare move that often signals a justice’s strong displeasure with a decision.”