1. CHANGE IN ASSESSED VALUATION 2007 Net Assessed Valuation$4,623,124,700 2006 Net Assessed Valuation$3,912,127,450 Net Increase (Dollars)$710,997,250 Net Increase (Percent)18.17% 1

2. CHANGE IN ASSESSED VALUATION 2 Comparing the 2006 assessed valuation to that of the 2007 valuation, we can see that there was an substantial increase of $711 million and that translates into a 18.17% increase over last year.

3. ASSESSED VALUATION HISTORY FYAssessed ValueΔ $Δ % 2001$3,114,496,666 2002$3,416,088,802$301,592,1369.68% 2003$3,401,426,935($14,661,867)(0.43%) 2004$3,530,449,613$129,022,6783.80% 2005$3,518,560,470($11,889,143)(0.30%) 2006$3,864,003,980$345,443,5109.80% 2007$3,912,127,450$48,123,4701.25% 2008$4,623,124,700$710,997,25018.17% 3

4. ASSESSED VALUATION HISTORY 4 When we talk about Assessments, this is probably the most important slide in the discussion. This slide tells us many things. 1.2002, 2004 and 2006 Were Reassessment Years. 2.Non-Reassessment Years, the District’s Valuation is Even to Down. 3.Next Reassessment Will Not Be Substantial 4.Why We Couldn’t Predict the Reassessment Increase A.Historically Reassessment Low. B.Housing Market Stabilized Two Years Ago, Reassessment Should Follow Same Path. 5.No Matter the Reassessment, Hancock Amendment Restricts Revenue Growth A.Prop R Had to Pass for Instructional Initiatives.

5. PROPOSED TAX RATE (BY PROPERTY CLASS) 2007 Ceiling 2007 Proposed Voluntary Reduction Residential$3.7979$3.2300($0.5679) Agricultural$4.1879$3.9000($0.2879) Commercial$3.9823$3.9000($0.0823) Personal Prop.$4.0779$3.9000($0.1779) Blended Rate$3.8819$3.4819($0.40) 5

6. PROPOSED TAX RATE (BY PROPERTY CLASS) 6 The District, with the Board’s approval, could levy up to the ceiling amount. If the District did this, the residents of the District would pay on average 32% more than last year. The District, with the Board’s approval, only wants to establish a tax rate that meets the District’s expenditure needs and allows for the instructional enhancements from Prop R. For this reason the administration recommends that we have a blended tax rate of $3.4819 for FY2007-08. The proposed levy is a reduction of over.40 from the tax rate ceiling based on the blended rate.

7. COMPARISON OF TAX RATES Proposed 2007Actual 2006Change Residential$3.2300$3.4270($0.1970) Agricultural$3.9000$3.8170$0.0830 Commercial$3.9000$3.6114$0.2886 Personal Prop.$3.9000$3.7079$0.1921 Blended Rate$3.4819$3.5151($0.0332) 7

8. COMPARISON OF TAX RATES Comparing this year’s proposed levy to that of last years, we can see there is a reduction of over $.03 between last year’s rate and this year’s proposed rate. Again, please note that voters approved raising the rate $.37 and the Board is reducing it by over $.03. 8

9. COMPARISON TO PRIOR YEAR TOTAL PROPERTY TAX REV. 2007/08 Projected Receipts$154,526,050 2006/07 Actual Receipts$133,366,610 Change (Dollars)$21,159,440 Change (Percentage)15.87% 9

10. COMPARISON TO PRIOR YEAR TOTAL PROPERTY TAX REV. Here are the revenue projections for FY2007-08. The projected receipts for 2007-08 increase by $21.1 million. This is an increase of 15.87% 10

11. BREAKDOWN OF REVENUE INCREASE CategoryDollarsPercentage Prop R Increase$16,045,54512.03% New Const. & Improve$1,096,2170.82% Reassessment$4,017,6772.60% Total$21,159,44015.87% 11

12. BREAKDOWN OF REVENUE INCREASE A further breakdown of the revenue increase shows the following: 1.Prop R impacts revenue by almost $16 million. 2.New construction and reassessment only account almost $5.1 million combined. If Prop R did not pass, revenue would have only increased by $5.1 million or 3.42% and would not have covered salary and benefit increases. This District could not have pursued the instructional enhancements without passing Prop R. The District can’t thank its patrons enough for approving the levy increase. 12

13. RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY TAX IMPACT (2006) Average Market Value of Home$205,000 Property Tax for AMV Home$1,335 13

14. RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY TAX IMPACT (2006) How does the tax rate impact the individual resident of the District? In 2006, the average market price of a home within Parkway was $205,000. The property tax assessed to the average homeowner would have been $1,335. I want to note this wasn’t the total property tax of the owner but the property tax assessed by Parkway School District. 14

15. RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY TAX IMPACT (2007) ValueΔ % Average Market Value of Home$243,50018.78% Property Tax for AMV Home (Ceiling) $1,75731.61% Property Tax for AMV Home (Proposed) $1,49411.94% 15

16. RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY TAX IMPACT (2007) 16 The average market value of a home in the Parkway School District is now $243,500. This is an 18.78% increase over 2006. If the Parkway School District used the tax ceiling as its tax rate, the average home owner would pay $1,757, this is a 31.6% or $422 increase. The proposed tax rate would increase the taxes of an average home in Parkway by 11.94% or $159. The District administration’s goal is to keep the residents of the District’s property tax in line with estimates from the November 2006 Prop R Levy increase. The proposed tax rates achieves this goal.