Acta

REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING The Regular Council Meeting was held on March 9, 2015 at 7:30 p.m. with Councilwoman Williams presiding in the absence of Council President Bonar. Council members present were Mr. Anderson, Mr. Dixon, Mr. Perza, Mr. Slavin, Mr. Hare, and Mr. Hutchison. Council staff members present were Police Chief Bernat, Mrs. Mitchell, Mrs. Townshend, Deputy Fire Chief Carey, Mr. Koenig, City Solicitor Rodriguez, and Mrs. McDowell. Mayor Christiansen was also present. OPEN FORUM The Open Forum was held at 7:15 p.m., prior to commencement of the Official Council Meeting. Council President Williams declared the Open Forum in session and reminded those present that Council was not in official session and could not take formal action. There was no one present wishing to speak during the Open Forum. The invocation was given by Reverend Theodore Henderson, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. AGENDA ADDITIONS/DELETIONS Mr. Hutchison moved for approval of the agenda, seconded by Mr. Dixon and unanimously carried. Mr. Hare moved for approval of the Consent Agenda, seconded by Mr. Anderson and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Mr. Bonar absent). ADOPTION OF MINUTES - REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 23, 2015 The Minutes of the Regular Council Meeting of February 23, 2015 were unanimously approved by motion of Mr. Hare, seconded by Mr. Anderson and bore the written approval of Mayor Christiansen. PUBLIC HEARING - VIOLATION OF THE DANGEROUS BUILDING ORDINANCE - PROPERTY LOCATED AT 312 WEST LOOCKERMAN STREET, OWNED BY RENEE AND DEBORAH BOLDS Mr. Perza advised that he has had a relationship with the prior property owner for over a decade and would therefore abstain from the discussion and vote on this item. A public hearing was duly advertised for this time and place to consider a violation of the Dangerous Building Ordinance at 312 West Loockerman Street, owned by Renee and Deborah Bolds. Mrs. Ann Marie Townshend, Director of Planning and Community Development, explained that the property is a one-story commercial brick building, formerly the business of My Place Tavern. The building was registered as a vacant building by City Staff in March of 2009. On February 23, 2014 City staff received complaints that individuals had tried to break into the property. Upon inspection, the doors to the property were damaged and staff proceeded to have all the doors boarded. In August of 2014, it was observed that the access door to the basement, which

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 9, 2015 PAGE 2 is located along the sidewalk of Loockerman Street, was deteriorated to such a degree that it was unsafe and, on November 6, 2014, the City had a contractor make repairs to the bilco door. There are currently $3,150 in outstanding charges for code citations and unpaid vacant building fees. The structure is in a serious state of disrepair and is vacant with no utilities. Mrs. Townshend reviewed a presentation depicting the condition of the structure (Exhibit #1). Staff recommended that City Council take the following action for property located at 312 West Loockerman Street: 1) declare the building on this property dangerous; 2) order the property repaired or demolished by September 9, 2015 by the owner or equity owner at their own risk; 3) order the Building Inspector to cause the demolition of the structure if not completed by the owner within 10 days of the date established by City Council; and 4) order the City Manager, with the assistance of the City Solicitor, to cause the cost of repairs or demolition to be charged against the land on which the building exists as a municipal lien or cause such cost to be added to the tax duplicate as an assessment, or to be levied as a special tax, or to be recovered in a suit at law against the owner. Responding to Mr. Hare, Mrs. Townshend stated that staff had no reason to believe that there were structural deficiencies, noting that it is a solid building. She advised that the issues were with the interior. Mrs. Townshend stated that staff had received quite a few complaints from other business owners and patrons of the downtown. Council President Williams declared the public hearing open and, there being no one present wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. Mr. Hare moved that the structure located at 312 West Loockerman Street be declared a dangerous building and ordered that the property be demolished or repaired by September 9, 2015, in accordance with the process recommended by staff. The motion was seconded by Mr. Hutchison and carried by a roll call vote of six (6) yes (Anderson, Dixon, Slavin, Hare, Hutchison, and Williams), one (1) abstention (Perza), and one (1) absent (Bonar). PUBLIC HEARING - VIOLATION OF THE DANGEROUS BUILDING ORDINANCE - PROPERTY LOCATED AT 381 RITA-WILMA ROAD, OWNED BY LUNA MISHOE A public hearing was duly advertised for this time and place to consider a violation of the Dangerous Building Ordinance at 381 Rita-Wilma Road, owned by Luna Mishoe. Mrs. Ann Marie Townshend, Director of Planning and Community Development, explained that this and the next dangerous building being considered are two (2) trailers owned by different people that sit on the same lot. The lot is owned by Wilma Mishoe. Mrs. Townshend advised that the property is a one-story 14 x 70 single wide manufactured home. The dwelling was condemned as unfit for human habitation on October 13, 2014 due to no utilities and to its state of disrepair. The front and rear doors are unable to be secured due to the damage caused from unknown subjects busting the doors knobs, locks and door jamb. Both doors have been

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 9, 2015 PAGE 3 boarded. Currently the structure is vacant, with no utilities and in a serious state of disrepair. Mrs. Townshend stated that there have been 17 code enforcement cases since 2010 for exterior code violations, no valid rental license, junked cars, no valid building permits, numerous grass violations, and parking on the grass. There are outstanding charges in the amount of $1,100 in grass fees and code citations. Mrs. Townshend reviewed a presentation depicting the condition of the structure (Exhibit #2). Staff recommended that City Council take the following action for property located at 381 Rita-Wilma Road: 1) declare the building on this property dangerous; 2) order the property repaired or demolished by April 9, 2015 by the owner or equity owner at their own risk; 3) order the Building Inspector to cause the demolition of the structure if not completed by the owner within 10 days of the date established by City Council; and 4) order the City Manager, with the assistance of the City Solicitor, to cause the cost of repairs or demolition to be charged against the land on which the building exists as a municipal lien or cause such cost to be added to the tax duplicate as an assessment, or to be levied as a special tax, or to be recovered in a suit at law against the owner. Council President Williams declared the public hearing open. Mr. Luna Mishoe, 638 Lakeside Drive, East Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania, stated that, to his knowledge, there are no junk cars on the property. He noted that, although the property is vacant, there is no mold and the ceilings are not falling down. Mr. Mishoe stated that they are in the process of cleaning out the trailers and one (1) is almost ready to rent. He advised that when they took a potential tenant to view the property, it had been boarded up. Mr. Mishoe stated that there are currently no utilities because the trailer is vacant. He also stated that they had put a lot of garbage out for trash pick up; however, the City refused to take it because it was too much. Mr. Mishoe requested that they pick up an acceptable amount each week until it was all picked up. He noted that he contacted the dump for information but never received a return call. Mr. Mishoe stated that he has recently learned that some family members no longer want the trailers on the property and he is now looking for a lot outside of the City to place the trailers on. He requested additional time to be able to relocate the trailers. Responding to Mr. Hutchison, Mr. Mishoe stated that he did not know the exact date that the trailers would be moved. Responding to Mr. Hare, Mr. Mishoe stated that he only learned of the $1,100 in outstanding charges for grass fees and code citations this evening. Mrs. Townshend noted that the citations are from 2012 and 2013 and they were issued and mailed by certified mail to Mr. Mishoe. Mr. Mishoe stated that he was willing to make arrangements regarding the citations. He requested an additional 30 to 60 days to resolve this matter. Mr. Perza asked if Mr. Mishoe would be able to make the necessary repairs without rental income. Mr. Mishoe stated that they do need the rental income; however, he realizes that there are things they need to do. Mrs. Townshend advised that there is a list of documented violations that will need to be addressed before it would be suitable to rent and before a rental permit would be issued.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 9, 2015 PAGE 4 There being no one else present wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. Mr. Hare moved that the structure located at 381 Rita-Wilma Road be declared a dangerous building and ordered that the property be demolished or repaired by May 9, 2015, in accordance with the process recommended by staff. The motion was seconded by Mr. Dixon and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Bonar absent). Mr. Phillip McDonald, Sr., 907 Townshend Boulevard, asked how this property came to the attention of Code Enforcement. Responding, Mrs. Townshend stated that inspections of rental properties occur on a routine basis and there was a list of violations for this property that had not been corrected and the owner was unresponsive. PUBLIC HEARING - VIOLATION OF THE DANGEROUS BUILDING ORDINANCE - PROPERTY LOCATED AT 383 RITA-WILMA ROAD, OWNED BY JOHNNIE D. BROOKER AND AYANNA K. MISHOE-BROOKER A public hearing was duly advertised for this time and place to consider a violation of the Dangerous Building Ordinance at 383 Rita-Wilma Road, owned by Johnnie D. Brooker and Ayanna K. Mishoe-Brooker. Mrs. Ann Marie Townshend, Director of Planning and Community Development, explained that this and the dangerous building previously considered are two (2) trailers owned by different people that sit on the same lot. The lot is owned by Wilma Mishoe. Mrs. Townshend advised that the property is a one-story 14 x 70 single wide manufactured home. The dwelling was condemned as unfit for human habitation on October 13, 2014 due to no utilities and to its state of disrepair. Numerous windows were busted and/or missing, and the front door locks were missing. Both doors have been boarded and secured. Currently the structure is vacant, with no utilities and in a serious state of disrepair. Mrs. Townshend noted that there have been 10 code enforcement cases since 2010 for exterior and interior code violations, electric disconnects, no rental agent, tall grass violations, and parking on the grass. There are outstanding charges in the amount of $550 for grass and vacant building fees. Mrs. Townshend reviewed a presentation depicting the condition of the structure (Exhibit #3). Staff recommended that City Council take the following action for property located at 383 Rita-Wilma Road: 1) declare the building on this property dangerous; 2) order the property repaired or demolished by May 9, 2015 by the owner or equity owner at their own risk; 3) order the Building Inspector to cause the demolition of the structure if not completed by the owner within 10 days of the date established by City Council; and 4) order the City Manager, with the assistance of the City Solicitor, to cause the cost of repairs or demolition to be charged against the land on which the building exists as a municipal lien or cause such cost to be added to the tax duplicate as an assessment, or to be levied as a special tax, or to be recovered in a suit at law against the owner. Responding to Mr. Anderson, Mrs. Townshend stated that the owners of record of the unit are the Brookers, the land is owned by Wilma Mishoe, and there are outstanding charges of $550.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 9, 2015 PAGE 5 Mr. Roy Sudler, Jr., 353 Rita-Wilma Road, stated that he was present representing the interest of his mother, Dr. Wilma Mishoe. Mr. Sudler asked who would be responsible for the fees if these violations have not been satisfied. Responding, Mrs. Townshend stated that any lienable fees would be attached to the property. Mr. Sudler, noting that his uncle, Luna Mishoe, stated that he was going to move the trailers, asked if there would be a need for the violations to be cured by May 9, 2015. Mrs. Townshend stated that moving the trailers would cure the violations. Mr. Sudler stated that they are not interested in providing a lot agreement to Mr. Luna Mishoe, which would be a requirement for him to obtain a rental permit. Mrs. Townshend stated that they would not deny a rental permit on that basis. Mr. Sudler stated that the municipal code specifies that the trailer park or mobile home owner has to have a directory or record of anyone that has a permit on their lot so that the City can review it and that would be a requirement for the permit. Mrs. Townshend stated that there are not many mobile homes in the City and she would have to review the Code to confirm that a lot agreement was required to obtain a rental permit. Mr. Luna Mishoe, 638 Lakeside Drive, East Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania, stated that he did not state specifically by when the mobile homes would be moved, only that they would be moved outside of the City of Dover. With regard to 383 Rita-Wilma Road, Mr. Mishoe stated that the last occupants left all of their belongings at the property and they had to get a court order to go in and clear the contents out, which took a long time. He noted that it is out for trash pickup. Mr. Mishoe advised that there is no mold or structural issues with the mobile home at 383 Rita-Wilma Road. He requested additional time to address the situation. There being no one else present wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. Mr. Hare moved that the structure located at 383 Rita-Wilma Road be declared a dangerous building and ordered that the property be demolished or repaired by May 9, 2015, in accordance with the process recommended by staff. The motion was seconded by Mr. Dixon and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Bonar absent). SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING REPORT - FEBRUARY 19, 2015 - PUBLIC HEARING - CITY REORGANIZATION A Special Council Meeting was held on February 19, 2015 at 6:00 p.m. with Council President Bonar presiding. CITY REORGANIZATION Council President Bonar reviewed a synopsis of previous action regarding Discussion - Responsibilities and Reporting Structure for the Mayor and City Manager and Continuation of Full-Time Status for the Position of Mayor, noting that during the Regular Council Meeting of February 9, 2015, members tabled this matter. Council President Bonar stated that the matter had been discussed at length and it was time to make a decision. Mr. Hutchison moved to lift Discussion - Responsibilities and Reporting Structure for the Mayor and City Manager and Continuation of Full-Time Status for the Position of Mayor from the table, seconded by Mr. Dixon.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 9, 2015 PAGE 6 Responding to Mr. Slavin, Council President Bonar explained that the previous meeting was rescheduled due to inclement weather and this matter was being discussed during a special meeting in order to “get it moving.” The motion to lift Discussion - Responsibilities and Reporting Structure for the Mayor and City Manager and Continuation of Full-Time Status for the Position of Mayor from the table was unanimously carried. Mr. Hutchison felt that this matter was one (1) of the most important things this Council and the Mayor have to consider for the future of the City. He stated that the complexity of the operation of the City had changed over the past 10 years and, since City Manager chose a City Manager to run the City, the City Manager should run the entire City. Mr. Hutchison reminded members that the Office of Mayor was changed to a full-time position for the purpose of being the economic development person; however, there are now several positions within the Economic Development Department that report to the Mayor, and the chief of police also reports to the Mayor. It was Mr. Hutchison’s feeling that the City Manager should be the chief operating officer of the City and report to City Manager. Referring to a proposed organization chart, he stated that only the Finance Department and City Clerk should continue to report to Council, and all other departments within the City should report to the City Manager. Agreeing with Mr. Hutchison, Mr. Hare stated that in order to hold a City Manager accountable, he needs to be given responsibility. He noted that a City Manager may not know how to run the Police Department or know every job; however, they can manage all departments because they have individuals with know-how who report to them. He expressed his opinion that the Council should choose to have a City Manager form of government in order to hold one (1) person responsible. Responding to Mr. Slavin, Council President Bonar stated that the format for this evening’s meeting would be open discussion about the following options: 1) a strong Mayor, in which the Mayor is CEO of the City and has responsibility over most of the management of the City; 2) to maintain the current City Council/City Manager form of government; and 3) a strong City Manager form of government, with the Controller and City Clerk reporting to Council, and all other department heads reporting to the City Manager. Council President Bonar thanked the members of the Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee for the long discussions regarding this matter. He expressed his opinion that it was time to make a decision and both Mr. Hare and Mr. Hutchison had explained the need for a strong City Manager form of government. Council President Bonar noted that just because the City has operated the same way for the past 40-45 years, it did not mean that it was the right way, and that it was Council’s responsibility to make a decision regarding the form of government.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 9, 2015 PAGE 7 Mr. Slavin reminded members that during the Regular Council Meeting of January 12, 2015, consideration of this item was deferred pending the outcome of discussions with Mr. Cecil Wilson and other parties to the 1988 Consent Decree, and questioned whether those discussions had occurred. Responding, Council President Bonar stated that he was not aware of those discussions taking place and reminded members that it was the opinion of the City Solicitor that the Consent Decree did not have an impact on the form of government. Mr. Dixon questioned if this change would make the City better. In response, Council President Bonar explained that each member of Council would have to make that determination. Mr. Hare expressed his opinion that having the ability to hold one (1) person accountable would make things better. Mr. Hutchison explained that under the proposed organizational structure for a City Manager form of government all department managers would maintain responsibility for their departments and they would report to the City Manager, as the chief operating officer. Responding to Mr. Slavin, Council President Bonar stated that the City Solicitor had indicated that the proposed change would not require a Charter amendment. In response to Mr. Slavin, Mr. Scott Koenig, City Manager, stated that he currently supervised approximately 200 employees, and under the proposed organizational structure for a City Manager form of government, he would supervise approximately 347 employees, including the Police Department, Economic Development Office, and Planning and Inspections Department. Mr. Slavin questioned if a pay increase would be expected for the City Manager to supervise an additional 147 employees. Responding, Mr. Koenig stated that any pay increase would be Council’s decision; however, he acknowledged that there would be the potential for a pay increase. Mr. Koenig explained that, currently, he was indirectly responsible for those 347 employees, through collective bargaining, budgeting, and capital improvements. Mr. Slavin agreed with the statements that this is one (1) of the most important issues that Council must consider and that just because the City has operated the same way for the past 40-45 years, did not mean that it was the right way; however, he noted that it did not mean it was the wrong way either. He stressed the importance in understanding the entire issue and determining what it would cost the City. Mr. Slavin stated he had attempted to maintain objectivity when this matter was considered by the Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee, and urged members of Council to remain objective as well. He noted that the current hybrid form of government was frustrating at times and was the result of organizing the City based on personalities rather than functions, which he hoped members would avoid during current considerations.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 9, 2015 PAGE 8 Mr. Slavin expressed concern regarding the consideration process, explaining that the Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee discussed this matter for at least six (6) months and suddenly a special meeting was scheduled to make a final decision, without television cameras or live public accessibility. He stated that the meeting was not even held in the Council Chambers and the meeting packets were made available six (6) hours prior to the meeting. Responding, Mrs. Traci McDowell, City Clerk, clarified that the meeting agenda was provided in advance and the packet information was posted to the website this morning; however, the information was provided in several previous packets. Mr. Slavin noted that this discussion had been a distraction and he hoped that a decision would be made soon, so members could concentrate on more serious matters. He suggested that members of the community be invited to comment on this matter at future meetings, and proposed that consideration be given to having a dispassionate third party, such as the League of Women Voters, host a forum. Mr. Slavin stated his expectation that members would be provided with a full fiscal analysis of the proposed change. Mrs. Williams questioned what type of expenses Mr. Slavin anticipated. Responding, Mr. Slavin stated that the proposed change would add an additional layer of management by shifting responsibilities to an existing position. In response to Mr. Hare, Mr. Slavin questioned whether the proposal would eliminate the Mayor’s position and the expenses associated with that office to offset the increased responsibilities of the City Manager and assistant City Manager positions. He stated that these positions would change significantly and a re-grading based on actual responsibilities would result in higher salaries. Mr. Hare stated that, currently, if there is a budgetary issue with economic development or the Police Department members rely on the City Manager for information. It was his opinion that if there was no change to the organizational structure, the City Manager’s pay could be decreased and the Mayor would be responsible and accountable for all aspects of the budget related to the Economic Development Office and Police Department. Mr. Hare stated that Council members were elected to make decisions and if they could not make decisions, they should not be on Council. He noted that members should not have to ask the League of Women Voters, or others, what they think should be done. Responding, Mr. Slavin disagreed, noting that a democracy is asking the people who use, live, and pay taxes in your City what their thoughts are. Mr. Hare stated that he had asked the opinions of people in the second district and that each member should ask their constituents’ opinions in order to represent them. He expressed concern regarding the fact that there was not one (1) person accountable for the City’s expenses and no accountability for the Mayor since he/she

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 9, 2015 PAGE 9 is elected to a four (4) year term. Mr. Hare emphasized his desire to have one (1) person responsible for the entire operation of the City, whether it is a full-time Mayor or the City Manager. Mr. Hutchison stated that the proposed change to a strong City Manager/chief operating officer would make the City Manager, who is selected based on education, knowledge, skill sets and professional training, responsible for the entire operation of the City, and the duties and responsibilities of the Mayor would also change. Mr. Slavin requested clarification regarding the four (4) options related to the organizational structure. In response, Mrs. McDowell explained that Mr. Hutchison requested the preparation of the fourth option, which proposed moving all departments, except for the Finance Department and City Clerk’s Office, under the City Manager. Mr. Slavin expressed concern regarding the process and questioned why members wanted to make this decision prior to the election in April. Responding, Mr. Hutchison stated that the Mayor is chosen based on popularity, not education, training, knowledge, or skill sets. He explained that, in comparing the skill sets of a Mayor and City Manager, it becomes very clear which position should be chief operating officer. Referring to the recent settlement of the Dover Police Department grievances, Mr. Hare stated that if the City Manager was the chief operating officer and cost the City $321,000, he would be held accountable and would be out of a job. He did not think that a decision needed to made tonight; however, he did not want to continue this discussion indefinitely and did not think the League of Women Voters needed to be involved. Clarifying, Mr. Slavin explained that he was not suggesting the solicitation of the opinion of the League of Women Voters; rather, he was proposing to invite a third party to host a forum, like the debates prior to an election. Mr. Koenig advised members that the Charter specifically states that the City has a Council/Manager form of government; however, through action, has gravitated toward a hybrid form of government. He stated his understanding that the hybrid government was the result of changes made based on previous personality issues. Mr. Koenig recollected that, in 2006, the planning director and tax assessor reported to the City Manager for a period of time, and there were no Charter changes, there was simply an action of Council. Mr. Koenig stated that, at one time, the Economic Development Office reported to the planning director, then the public services manager, and was then assigned to him when he became interim City Manager; however, it was moved under the Mayor by a vote of Council without any Charter or ordinance changes. Additionally, Mr. Koenig explained that other hybrids in the current structure were the result of

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 9, 2015 PAGE 10 attempts to contract the government. When the director of parks, recreation, and the library retired, the library director became an independent position and the responsibility of parks and recreation was assigned to the planning director through an administrative assignment between him and Mrs. Ann Marie Townshend, Director of Planning and Community Development. Likewise, when the director of central services retired, the position was not filled and there was an administrative assignment of those functions related to the warehouse procurement to the Controller/Treasurer. Mr. Koenig stated that, although there have been a number of “moving of the tiles” in the last 25 years, the Charter has maintained the Council/Manager form of government. Mr. Koenig explained that, in the last 25 years, there was no hybrid connection with the Police or Fire Departments. The Police Department reports to the Mayor and the Charter provides specific authorization for the Mayor to appoint the officers. In accordance with the Charter, the fire chief reports directly to the Council President; however, the employees of the Fire Department are covered under two (2) specific collective bargaining agreements, so they fall under the City’s personnel guidelines which the City Manager is responsible for. Mr. Koenig stated that, as chief administrative officer of the City, he has indirect responsibility and obligations for all of these functions; however, the design of the government provides each of these functions the ability to go around the City Manager; the Police Department can go directly to the Mayor, the Fire Chief can go directly to the Council President, and Council Appointees can appeal directly to Council. He indicated that this structure creates operational challenges for the City Manager because there has to be “buy in” on everything in order to make a change. For example, Mr. Koenig stated that he previously brought forward a proposal regarding changes to the Economic Development Office; however, Council did not accept the proposal and made different adjustments instead. Additionally, Mr. Koenig reminded members that discussions related to emergency dispatch were halted because the organizational structure does not provide the City Manager with the ability to make such a change administratively. He stated that the current structure places him in an odd position because he is responsible for controlling costs but there are opportunities to avoid or work around his recommendations which, from an effectiveness standpoint, makes it difficult to manage the City. Mr. Slavin questioned whether Mr. Hutchison would have rather reported to the Mayor or City Manager when he served as the police chief. Responding, Mr. Hutchison stated that the City was not as complex at that time. He felt that there had been a loss of control in operations of the City because there is not one (1) single person in charge. Noting that, not that long ago, Mr. Hutchison served as Mayor, Mr. Slavin questioned how the reporting structure was different at that time. In response, Mr. Hutchison explained that, at that time, there was a much closer working relationship between the Mayor’s Office and the City Manager’s Office. He stated that he worked with the City Manager everyday and was involved in issues dealing with the complexity of

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 9, 2015 PAGE 11 operations; however, there is now a separation due to the different styles of leadership in the Mayor’s Office. Mr. Hutchison reminded members that he knew the operation of the Police Department because he worked there for 25 years, while more recent Mayors are directly responsible for a “semi-military operation” without training or education regarding the operations of a police department. Responding to Mr. Slavin, Mr. Hutchison stated that a City Manager would have the skill set to manage a police department. Mrs. Williams advised members that she served as Mayor for four (4) months and, during that time, there was an advise and consent only relationship between the police and Mayor. She felt that this relationship was based on the office, not personality or skill set. Mr. Hare expressed his opinion that there would not be a popularity contest with the City Manager. Although a City Manager may not be an expert in the functions of each department, the experts will continue to run the departments and will be accountable to the City Manager. Mr. Slavin informed members that constituents had questioned why the City would not make the CEO an elected official, accountable directly to the voters, if the CEO is not a subject matter expert in any one (1) department but is the manager of managers. Responding, Mr. Hare stated that there would be no way to remove a Mayor/CEO if they messed everything up. Mr. Slavin stated that, during his first term on Council, he felt that Council should be isolated as the legislative branch of city government, to appropriate money, watch how it is appropriated, and have a governance function to monitor accountability. He explained that in a typical democracy, the executive branch, the top person, is elected by the voters, which he thought should be the Mayor, and the City Manager would be the chief operating officer, who would be appointed by the Mayor with the advice and consent of council. Mrs. Williams agreed with Mr. Hare, noting that the City of Dover did not have “deep enough pockets” to run the risk of not having any recourse for four (4) years, should it go wrong. In response to Council President Bonar, Mr. Koenig stated that his annual salary was $121,500. Council President Bonar advised members that the stated salary in the budget for the cabinet secretary for the State of Delaware was $127,000. He felt that the City needed to have a chief operating officer with oversight over every department, so the department heads know who they answer to and follow the same procedures for personnel management, accounting, etc. Council President Bonar stated that it was perplexing that the City Manager was not able to make decisions regarding the City’s

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 9, 2015 PAGE 12 emergency dispatch center since it is a cost issue. He felt that this change would not cost the City; however, it would make the City more efficient. Mr. Hare noted that no one had justified the need for a full-time Mayor. Responding, Mr. Slavin stated that would be the next part of the discussion because there would need to be a reaction regarding the role of the Mayor based on the initial action. Mr. Hare advised members that when the Mayor became a full-time position in 1997, the position was supposed to be the economic development director, public relations person, and lobby the legislature; however, the previous City Manager took these responsibilities away from the Mayor. He stated that anybody in the room could be Mayor and questioned what they would know about running a police department or the City’s budget. Mr. Hare felt that if the City was going to have a strong City Manager, then the Mayor’s responsibilities would need to be addressed. He informed members that every capital city in this country did not have a full-time Mayor; however, if the City of Dover were going to maintain a full-time Mayor, responsibilities would need to be assigned to the position. Mr. Slavin reminded members that support for a full-time Mayor was confirmed by the voters in 2004, when it went to referendum. He noted that although the Mayor was given the responsibility for economic development, it was never indicated that the Mayor would be the only individual to work on economic development in the City and, over time, it has grown to a job for more than one (1) person. Mr. Hare stated that the City currently has four (4) economic development positions, which he believed was more than any other three (3) cities in the entire State. Responding to Mr. Hare, Mr. Slavin stated that the most effective economic development strategy in the current economy is to not lose the jobs that you have. Mrs. Williams stated that the Mayor also served as the legislative liaison from the City of Dover to the General Assembly and other city governments, and no concerns had been expressed regarding that responsibility. Responding, Mr. Slavin stated that he had previously expressed concerns because, at that time, the person in the position of Mayor was over-advocating for things that council did not know about, did not support, and had not voted on. Mr. Hutchison stated that he would always support a full-time Mayor. The Mayor’s responsibilities for public relations include meeting with Dover Air Force Base officials, the General Assembly, Governor’s Office, State and County economic development offices, and working with local business leaders. He felt that, if this change were approved to allow the City Manager to look at the organization, the City Manager would bring forward recommendations for change in “a short period of time.” Mr. Hutchison stated that one (1) of the duties and responsibilities of the Mayor’s Office should be economic development, noting that it is directly related to the public relations function. He felt that the Mayor would still need the ability to work with the City Manager, finance department, and other management within the City.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 9, 2015 PAGE 13 Responding to Mr. Slavin, Mr. Hutchison stated that he did not think economic development should be under the Mayor. He explained that his focus was on making the City Manager the chief operating officer of the City in order to regain control. Any additional changes that would need to occur could be addressed by the City Manager in due time. Mr. Hare felt that the City Manager did not have to make proposals to council, explaining that if the City Manager wanted to get rid of the electric director, he would not need Council’s permission. It was Mr. Hare’s opinion that Council had strayed from its role as the legislative body and had begun running the City. He stated that Council needed to get back to being the legislative body and let the City Manager run the City. Mr. Koenig informed members that the Mayor performs a lot of ceremonial duties and meets with many local groups as well as overseas contingents. Additionally, many people who are interested in an economic development project want to meet with the Mayor first. However, once the first contact is made, the project gets turned over administratively to the people who can actually deliver various components of an economic development project. He explained that the Mayor and economic development director do not have the authority to bind the City; the City Manager can bind the City but has to bring most issues before council first. Mr. Koenig advised members that economic development becomes a team approach for all of the department directors involved. For example, with the Playtex expansion, the Mayor’s Office got the first call, but from that call the City Manager’s Office, and planning, electric, public works and economic development staff have all played a role in the delivery of the project. While the Economic Development Office should be out making those contacts to businesses, once that fish comes to the City, it gets distributed out to everyone else to deliver the project. Mr. Koenig stated that, if there were no Mayor, all of the ceremonial duties would have to be distributed to Council members and that is not really the function of council. He stated that, surprisingly, the Mayor of a city of 37,000 has a lot of ceremonial duties. Mr. Koenig thought it was probably more than 10 to 20 hours per week, depending on the week. He noted that the contact with Dover Air Force Base alone, if it’s managed to the fullest extent, represents a large number of those hours. Mrs. Williams stated that she did not feel it should include trips to Japan and Germany that have no economic impact in the City. She noted that it was carried way too far and one (1) of the reasons why there was so much controversy about this office was because of the use of the money within the confines of the office. Mr. Anderson stated that Mr. Hutchison’s Option D proposal made a lot of sense and, if passed, he thought they would be alright. He did, however, prefer Option C, which gives more reporting responsibility to the City Manager, as well. Mr. Anderson stated that the advantage with Option C is that it doesn’t require any Charter changes. Council President Bonar stated that the City Solicitor’s opinion was that Option D would not require a Charter amendment because it already specifically states that the City has a council-manager form of government.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 9, 2015 PAGE 14 Referring to the Charter, Mr. Anderson noted that it specifically states that the Mayor is the conservator of the peace and appoints the police chief. Responding, Mrs. McDowell stated that a Charter amendment was being proposed by Mayor Christiansen which would establish a committee to make recommendations to the Mayor on the selection of a police chief. The Mayor’s recommendation would then be confirmed by council. Responding to Mr. Hare, Mrs. McDowell advised that the Charter currently states that the Mayor selects all of the police officers and council sets the number of officers and assigns the salaries. Mr. Anderson stated that Option C would transfer the budget authority to the City Manager without changing any of the appointment strategies. He felt it would address the issues without a Charter amendment. Responding to Mr. Hare, Mr. Anderson stated that if the City Manager did not like what the Police Department was doing, it would be a joint situation in which the Mayor had appointing authority and the City Manager would hold the purse strings. Mr. Koenig stated that he was in this exact situation last month when he said that he did not have a budget plan for 10 additional officers and, yet, it went directly to council who authorized it without a budget plan. Mr. Koenig reminded members that the Charter says that the City Manager is responsible for presenting the budget. He did not know if that legally implies that he is responsible for executing the budget. Mr. Koenig reiterated that there is potential for end-runs around the budget for anybody who does not report directly to the City Manager. He noted that the Electric Director does not have the opportunity to come to council and ask for 10 linemen because it is not allowed under the Charter. Mr. Slavin noted that there were a number of members of the public in attendance and requested they be given the opportunity to speak. Mrs. Williams moved to waive the rules to allow public comment, seconded by Mr. Hare and unanimously carried. Mr. George Gaudioso, 167 Maple Glen Drive, stated that Option B, which is the present structure, is ripe for dysfunction because there is really no one (1) person who is responsible in the end. He believed that the ideal structure was the council-manager form of government. Mr. Gaudioso stated that Dover has an approximate population of 35,000-37,000. He noted that as of 2014 there were 889 municipalities nationally with a population of 25,000-49,999 and 552, or 62%, of those municipalities had a council-manager form of government. Mr. Gaudioso stated that 299, or 34%, had a Mayor-Council form of government. Mr. Gaudioso stated that the current structure is a budgetary nightmare because there is one (1) department of government creating its own budget which then has to be rectified with the overall City budget. He felt that there needed to be centralized control and responsibility so that there is someone to “call on the carpet” when something goes wrong.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 9, 2015 PAGE 15 Mr. Gaudioso stated that he contacted other Delaware municipalities that have City Managers, including Newark and Seaford. He agreed that there is a need for a Mayor to act as a point person and fulfill the ceremonial responsibilities. Mr. Gaudioso suggested that Council members amongst themselves could elect someone to serve in the role of Council Member/Mayor. He stated that his preferred choice would be to have the At-Large Council Member serve in the role of Council Member/Mayor. Mr. Gaudioso noted that the Mayor’s salary is $45,000, in addition to a $5,000 expense account, so the City is spending $50,000 plus administrative and support expenses per year for the office of the Mayor. With all of the City’s financial constraints, he asked if the money could be put to better use. Mr. Gaudioso stated that he is opposed to a strong Mayor, especially with a four (4) year term and no recall vote. He noted that if the City Manager screws up, as long as you meet the terms of his employment agreement and you follow due process, you can get rid of him and you are not stuck with him for four (4) years. Referring to the issue of increased costs in the City Manager’s Office if he is given additional responsibility, Mr. Gaudioso asked what the cost would be. He stated that City Manager’s are like any other managerial position, they do not necessarily have to know every single thing about every single branch or department under their responsibility. What they do have to do is to supervise them and be aware of what’s taking place in those departments and if something’s wrong, then it should be addressed. Mr. Slavin stated that the issue of Council electing the Mayor or the At-Large council person serving as Mayor had been discussed; however, the Consent Decree governs the exact form. He thought that it was worth pursuing a discussion with the parties to the lawsuit. Mr. James Hosfelt, former Police Chief, stated that he had an issue with trying to change the form of government or city structure before the election, which is two (2) months away. Because it has waited this long, he felt that it could wait until after the election when the office of the Mayor could change. Mr. Hutchison stated if the Consent Decree, which totally removed the Mayor from operations, were modified, it could move the Mayor back with council. Mr. Anderson stated that there have been some improvements made to the government; however, he felt that they needed to study it in a larger context and look at a whole performance audit of the City government. He noted that he has been discussing LEAN government with Mrs. Mitchell, Controller/Treasurer, and if there is going to be reorganization, it should be based on efficiency. Mr. Hare moved to hold a Public Hearing at the March 9, 2015 Regular Council meeting regarding Options A, B, C, and D (Exhibit #4). The motion was seconded by Mr. Hutchison and carried by a roll call vote of five (5) yes (Slavin, Williams, Hare, Hutchison, and Bonar) and two (2) no (Anderson, Dixon)(Perza absent).

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 9, 2015 PAGE 16 Councilman Slavin, Chair of the Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee, stated that this issue had been discussed since at least May of last year with separate actions and motions passed about how they want to approach this - four (4) separate times by Council and six (6) separate times by the Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee. Mr. Slavin advised that the Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee had forwarded this issue to Council with no recommendation. He noted that, if the question is whether they want to change the form of government, the two (2) critical pieces to it are: 1) to what form of government and 2) what is the process by which they do that. Mr. Slavin stated that there will be a lot of back-work that will have to be done, noting that there are at least 15 references in the Charter to the duties of the Mayor and at least 15 ordinances that will have to be amended, each of which will require time to get through. Mr. Hutchison stated that the City Manager is chosen based on education, knowledge, and training to oversee and manage the City. The City Manager is responsible for the budget and it is critical for the City to have a boss - one (1) person to manage and oversee. The City Manager works at the pleasure of City Council based on performance. If an elected official makes a mistake, you cannot fire them. Looking at the future of the City, it is getting harder and harder to manage. Unfortunately, when we make mistakes, it costs us money. Mr. Hutchison thought that Council had an opportunity and responsibility to address this issue. He suggested that the Finance Department and the City Clerk’s Office would continue to work directly for Council and all others would report to the City Manager who would report to the Mayor or City Council. He felt strongly that members needed to stop talking about it and move forward. Council President Williams declared the public hearing open. Mr. George Gaudioso, 167 Maple Glen Drive, stated that he was in support of Option D. He noted that it would be operationally efficient with most of the City’s departments, with the exception of the City Controller and the City Clerk, reporting directly to a professionally trained City Operating Officer. In today’s operating environment, he thought it was necessary to have someone in charge who knows how to deal with the challenges to and intricacies of today’s municipal government. Mr. Gaudioso stated that Option D would be cost effective because the development of various department’s budget requests would be formulated and overseen by the City Manager and he would ultimately be responsible for seeing that expenditures fall within their eventual allotted amounts. He noted that it is a lot easier to evaluate, meet, and control the staffing needs, equipment, and ancillary needs of the various departments in the municipal government with one (1) person in charge. Mr. Gaudioso stated that there is direct accountability with Option D. If the citizens and/or the City Council feel that the City Manager is negligent in performing his duties, the City Council may remove him without having to wait for the next election, as long as due process is followed. Mr. Gaudioso stated that a City Manager is accessible and, speaking from personal experience, his homeowner’s association has had numerous contacts with the City Manager, who has helped them to solve several problems within their community. Mr. Gaudioso advised that Option D gives each City Council member greater influence over how the city operates. Since the City Manager answers directly to City Council, each City Council member, through the power of his or her vote, can ensure that his or her district is receiving the service it duly deserves.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 9, 2015 PAGE 17 Mr. Eugene Ruane, 122 Shadow Court, stated that he had opening remarks about the importance of maintaining the Council-Manager form of government; however, because of the previous discussion regarding the appointment of the City Manager, Mr. Ruane read his prepared comments related to the appointment of the City Manager and requested that his prepared comments be submitted for the record, as follows: Comments of Eugene Ruane, 122 Shadow Court at Public Hearing on Government Reorganization before the Dover City Council on March 9, 2015 Thank you for the opportunity to offer some comments on the Dover City Council's recent discussions about its form of government. As these discussions continue, I think it is important to remember some of the compelling reasons why Dover should continue to be governed under the Council-Manager form of government. Consider the following aspects of Dover's Council-Manager form of government: Each member of the nine person City Council has an equal voice in policy development, administrative oversight; and, the future of the city rather than a single individual. And because Dover elects Council members on a district basis, neighborhoods, diverse groups and individual citizens have a greater opportunity to engage in decision making and to influence policy. This ensures a more balanced approach to community decision making. Political power is concentrated in the entire governing body. It's much more difficult for special interests to influence decisions when a majority of the Council's support is needed rather than having to influence only a single elected official, such as, a Mayor, in the Mayor-Council form of government that some are suggesting. And while policy making resides with the entire governing body, oversight of the day-to-day operations of the city's administration resides with an appointed professional manager. He or she is the "chief executive officer of the city "who carries out the Council's policies with an emphasis on effective, efficient, and equitable service delivery. Whereas, in the Mayor-Council form of government, the day-to-day management shifts to the Mayor, who often lacks the appropriate training, education, and experience in municipal administration and finance. Using merit and professional qualifications as criteria for hiring and personnel decisions, the City Manager ensures the effective provision of services, whereas under the Mayor-Council form, there is a strong temptation to make decisions regarding hiring and firing based on the applicant's political support rather than his or her professional qualifications. Moreover, Section 36 of Dover's Charter explicitly prohibits the Council or any of its committees or members from directing or requesting the appointments or removals of; or giving orders to employees in the city's administrative service who

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 9, 2015 PAGE 18 are under the charge of the City Manager. Violations are classified as misdemeanors, conviction of which shall immediately forfeit the office of the member so convicted. And, this provision was made applicable to the Dover Mayor when the Mayor's duties and responsibilities were delineated in Section 2-221 of Article IV, Division 2 of the City's Code of Ordinances. Whereas, in the Mayor-Council form of government the Mayor's position is not likely to have such a prohibition; and, again the temptation is strong for the Mayor to give directions to any and all employees. Appointment of the City Manager Now, I understand that one of the changes you are considering relates to the appointment of the City Manager. The appointing authority for the City Manager's position in the Dover charter rests with the nine person council rather than with a single individual, such as, the Mayor. This is standard practice in Council-Manager cities and for good reason. First of all, it is important to preserve the principle that the manager's office is a nonpolitical one which does not change with a new Mayor. If the Mayor selected the City Manager a political expectation would be created that a new Mayor should pick his or her own manager. The reputation of the city as a good place for managers to work would also be tarnished, and the best candidates may avoid Dover in the future. Moreover, the chances of having a more objective evaluation of a candidate for the City Manager position and for evaluating the effectiveness of a manager once hired is greater than if only a single individual has the sole power of judgment. There are also other negative consequences that would be produced in Dover's government if the City Manager were made subordinate to the Mayor. Greater separation of powers between the Mayor and Council would develop, together with greater conflict and increased resistance to a Mayor's personal agenda from the council, as they may very well not agree with his or her policy directions. And, there would be significant ambiguity in the lines of authority between each set of elected officials and the manager. The advantages of cooperative relationships between elected and professional leadership would be jeopardized, while the professional independence of the manager would be compromised, as he or she may be expected to act as the Mayor's agent rather than serving the entire council. A Mayor who has such authority over a City Manager may ignore the team building aspects of his or her position and become someone who uses the position of the City Manager to push a personal agenda, ignoring the council.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 9, 2015 PAGE 19 Giving the Mayor such authority over the City Manager could also have the effect of diminishing the influence of Dover's more representative, district based council that was created to ensure representation from all our neighborhoods and especially, minority-groups. Misunderstanding in Dover's Charter about Chief Executive Officer In section 14 of Dover's Charter the position of the Mayor is referred to as "the chief executive and chief elected official of the city"; and, in section 33, the City Manager is referred to as the "chief administrative officer of the city". Such designations are not consistent with the council-manager form of government as noted in Article III, section 3.04 of the Model City Charter published by the Municipal League. By using the "executive" designation for the Mayor's position the Dover Charter gives the impression that the Mayor and not the manager is responsible for the day to day management of the city. As noted in the commentary on the Model Charter, on page 11, "the Mayor of a Council-Manager city is not an executive as in the Mayor-Council form". He or she is the "ceremonial head of the city"; and, its "most conspicuous official of the city". And, because the Mayor in a Council-Manager city is free from "executive responsibilities for the day-to-day municipal operations" he/she can "focus attention on major policy issues and important facilitative activities". The Mayor in Dover's government does not monitor the annual budget and Council policies related thereto. The City Manager does, with additional oversight from the City Treasurer/Comptroller. The role of Dover's City Manager should be more accurately defined in Dover's charter by designating the City Manager's position as "the chief executive officer of the city", as recommended in Article III, section 3.04 of the Model Charter. The role of Dover's Mayor would be more accurately defined in Dover's charter with language similar to the language recommended in the Model Charter, namely, that the Mayor is "the head of the city government for all ceremonial purposes"; or, simply use the phrase: "chief elected official of the city". Ms. Sara Herbert, 223 North Bradford Street, on behalf of herself and six (6) other State Street residents, read the following statement: Based on the March 4th newspaper article, we support the following: 1) A full time Mayor because the city is growing and the Mayor should be the face of the city. Thriving cities have involved, full time Mayors. 2) The Mayor being in charge of the police department’s day to day activities. An elected official can be more directly held accountable by the citizens for the handling of our concerns. It’s easier to have a continuing conversation

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 9, 2015 PAGE 20 when it’s necessary, and we are more likely to have follow-up in a reasonable time if we have an elected official. We are really uncomfortable with our concerns floating through the city government bureaucracy. 3) A special committee to select the police chief, and the idea of the Mayor only being able to fire the chief with the support of at least 2/3 of the council. 4) Expanding the search for a police chief outside the department will provide a wider choice of eligible candidates, but it should not deny an in-house choice when appropriate. 5) Clarifying the timing of city elections and special elections when a council person vacancy needs to be acted upon. Mr. Phillip McDonald, Sr., 907 Townshend Boulevard, stated that he recently wrote a piece in the paper and his primary interest is to keep things pretty much as they are. He noted that he is appreciative of the Mayor being the face of the City and the authority of the City, working with City Council. Mr. McDonald stated that he thought there was a power grab going on and that they are washing cash. He also stated that he wants the Mayor to be in charge of the police so that he has an elected official to call and to be accountable if the police do not respond in a timely manner. Mr. Roy Sudler, Jr., 353 Rita-Wilma Road, stated that he believes they will continue to have a full-time Mayor with a title of Chief Executive Officer and that a strong Mayor-Council form of government is needed. He believes that the City Manager and the Mayor could have a closer relationship, which would enable the Mayor to better inform his or her constituents as to the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats of the City when he advocates city businesses or other agencies coming to the City of Dover. Mr. Sudler stated that he thought there needed to more cohesion between the City Council and the Mayor so there won’t be a power struggle. He felt that constituents would feel better about getting things done within the City if they had one (1) person that they could talk to. Mr. Sudler thought that the City Manager did a great job; however, he felt that the Mayor should be the focal point of City activity and compliance and that the Mayor deserves to have more duties, powers, and responsibilities, especially if he/she is going to be viewed as the person that is going to be held accountable. Mr. Anderson noted that Trenton, Harrisburg, Annapolis, and Saulsbury, all cities similar in size to Dover, have a strong Mayor form of government, and noted that Harrisburg was found to be one (1) of the top 10 cities to live in. Ms. Janice Gaddis, 448 North State Street, stated that she could not understand the timing of considering this issue, noting that they could not vote on it that evening and there was an election coming up. She did not feel that it should be dealt with before the election. Ms. Gaddis stated that she was in favor of a strong Mayor because the Mayor is elected by all of the residents, unlike City Council members.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 9, 2015 PAGE 21 Mr. Hutchison stated that no matter what happens, the changes would have to be approved by the General Assembly. Noting that he has served the City as both the police chief and a part-time and a full-time Mayor, he believes the City needs a full-time Mayor. Mr. Hutchison stated that the duties and responsibilities of the Mayor are different now than they used to be. Recalling a time when the Mayor presided over the Council meetings, made all of the council appointments, had a vote, there were only eight (8) members of Council instead of nine (9), and the Mayor served as the Chief Executive Officer and had authority, Mr. Hutchison advised that that has all changed and the most powerful elected person in City government today is the Council President. He also stated that he is a huge supporter of the Mayor. Mayor Robin Christiansen stated that he asked the question “what does Dover want to be when we grow up” when he first ran for Council in 1983. He stated that he wants Dover to be a thriving city with job opportunities and a place for everyone to live and he believes that the Mayor should be the Chief Executive Officer of the City, with the safeguard of a professional City Manager chosen by the members of City Council. Mayor Christiansen thought it was important for the Mayor to continue to be involved in the day-to-day operations of the Police Department, not setting policy but making sure that the public is served in the way that they have come to expect, and that public safety is the Mayor’s first responsibility. Mayor Christiansen stated that he believed there was room for the City Manager and the Mayor to work together formulating the budgets and that it was the Mayor’s responsibility to look out for the public in the budget process. He stated that he did not believe that the Mayor should be involved in the legislative process because of the Consent Decree and in order to maintain the validity of the veto, which safeguards the public. Mayor Christiansen stated that he respects and understands the concerns of members of council related to issues that occurred before he became the Mayor and the dollars and cents that it cost the taxpayers. He felt that it was a past issue that should be addressed at a later date. Mayor Christiansen stated that, if members choose to change the form of government, it should not be a knee jerk reaction and they should use the variables x, y, and z, not the names of individuals who have in the past or will in the future serve the City in those positions. There being no one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. Mr. Hare stated that he felt that the Mayor’s position should be full-time. He noted that when they made the decision to make the Mayor’s position full-time in 1997, the Mayor’s responsibilities were to be the face of the City, to be the economic development arm of the City working with the City Manager, and now the Assistant City Manager, working with the Legislature for things that would happen for the City, and even being the City’s public relations person. Mr. Hare stated that, regardless of who the Police Department answers to, the Mayor will always be there for concerns. He asked why the City should have a professional City Manager, hired and fired by Council, if the City Manager cannot be responsible for the budget and the expenditures of the whole City. Mr. Hare stated that there are two (2) very qualified people that are only really responsible for just over half of the City and everyone says they can do the budget; however, if the other half of the City doesn’t like the budget that has been proposed, they can go around them to their boss, which is the Mayor, as has happened in the past. He thought that the City, with the exception of the Finance Director and the City Clerk, should report to the City Manager. Mr. Hare stated that, if members decide they want a strong mayor, then the City Manager could report to the Mayor, just like in Wilmington where

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 9, 2015 PAGE 22 nobody except the City Manager goes directly to the Mayor. He felt that the City Manager needed to have control over the whole City and he should report to the Mayor to avoid having finances going in different directions and holding one (1) man responsible for them when he is not responsible for the budget. Mr. Hare moved to continue with a full-time Mayor, who is the Chief Executive, and that all the departments in the City, with the exception of the Finance Office, the Assessor’s Office, and the City Clerk’s Office report to the City Manager, who is the Chief Operating Officer. The City Manager will then report to the Mayor. The Mayor has no per-se responsibility over any individual office. If he has an issue, he and the City Manager will deal with it and then, together, it will be done. Everything is the responsibility of the City Manager. Responding to Mr. Slavin, Mr. Hare clarified that his intent was for the City Manager to be responsible for the running of the City and he reports to the Mayor and everyone else reports to the City Manager and the Mayor remains full-time. At the request of Council President Williams, Mrs. Traci McDowell, City Clerk, stated that she heard the following: The Mayor will continue to be full-time and will be the Chief Executive of the City, all departments, with the exception of the City Clerk’s Office and the Finance Department, will report to the City Manager and the City Manager will report to the Mayor. Responding to Mr. Slavin, Mr. Hare clarified that the City Manager would be the Mayor’s assistant, more or less, but responsible for the City. The motion was seconded by Mr. Anderson. Mr. Hutchison stated that, according to the Charter, the Mayor has total control over the Police Department and all other departments come under the City Manager. Responding, Mrs. Williams clarified that the current motion would put the Police Department under the City Manager. Mr. Hare stated that there would be a lot of changes and they would not happen to, it would just be a recommendation and they would have to go in and change a lot of things. Mr. Perza stated that he heard comments and a lot of ideas from George, Gene, Sara, Phil, Roy, Janice, the Mayor, and members of Council. He thought there was a lot of synthesis in the ideas because a lot of the comments were similar. We are looking for ways of safeguarding the public’s interest, ways of making the City more efficient, and protecting mistakes that we have made in the past. Mr. Perza stated that he liked public hearings when there are big issues like this that affect the City for, potentially, the next generation. He felt that it was important to get this right. Mr. Perza stated that he was hesitant to make any kind of motion or vote tonight on anything until they have had a chance to sit down and think about all the comments that were made by the public and read all of the written comments submitted. He noted that he had a lot of respect for Mr. Ruane, who had been a member of this body since Mr. Perza was a kid, and he was interested in reading what he had to say in his comments because he only addressed one (1) area, which is the difficulty and challenge in providing only three (3) minutes. He indicated the same for Mr. Gaudioso’s comments. Mr. Perza reiterated that public hearings are good because they crystalize and clarify the different arguments, noting that there appeared to be two (2) sides of this debate and he did not want to force

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 9, 2015 PAGE 23 a vote without synthesizing and piecing together the comments. He thought it would take a reasonable period of time, not one (1) or two (2) years, but it is helpful to hear how it will impact the people that live in the community. Mr. Perza stated that he thought they needed some time to think and consider and turn the comments into something that can be articulated to the people of Dover. Whether that falls into the upcoming election or not, if it can be synthesized into Option A and Option B in time for the April election so they can get feedback from people based on who’s running and what option everybody supports, it would be useful for that process. Mr. Perza again expressed his hesitance to vote on anything locking them into something that they had not fully vetted yet. He thought they were on the right track but that they were getting ahead of themselves. Mr. Slavin stated that the process they have gone through appears to have been an inside process primarily consisting of Committee hearings stuck in right before the Council meetings, items appearing on the Council agendas, and a Special Council meeting held in a conference room on a Wednesday night. He thought there could be a more public vetting process and he stated that he was in favor of hearing more public comments. Mr. Slavin stated that he thought members needed to respect the balance of power that exists in all forms of government in this country and make sure that is ensured. He noted that members had complained about the current hybrid form of government, and it appeared to him that the answer to that was going to be the creation of another hybrid form of government. Mr. Slavin stated that a business would provide some kind of fiscal analysis to tell them what the full cost would be, noting that he was sure that it would cost something. He reminded members that the City Manager has said that he currently supervises 250 people and if the Police Department reports to him, that number will more than double. Mr. Slavin thought it stood to reason that those things will have cost drivers. He noted that he agreed with Mr. Perza that they were on the right track, although not anywhere near making a decision. Mr. Slavin stated that he thought they were unanimous in the confusion that they have created for voters. He stated that, at the end of the day, it is about what their constituents want in a city government, noting that what the people he has listened to want are safe neighborhoods, safe streets, their trash picked up, their snow plowed, roads that work, libraries and parks that are accessible, the flowers planted, and the street lights to work. Mr. Slavin thought that how they get there may not be the number one issue for the constituents but Council has let it become the number one issue for them and he thought they might be missing some bigger things while they talk about it. Mr. Hare thought that the only issues they had were if they wanted a full-time Mayor and if they wanted everyone reporting to the City Manager, who would then report to the Mayor. He stated that if everyone did not report to the City Manager, they should not call him a City Manager. Mr. Hare thought that if everyone reported to the City Manager, then the City Manager should report to the Mayor. If the responsibilities remain split, he thought the City Manager should report to City Council and if the Police Department remained under the Mayor, the City Manager should no longer be responsible for the Police Department’s budget. The motion to maintain a full-time Mayor who will be the Chief Executive of the City and that all departments, excluding the City Clerk’s Office and the Finance Department, will report to the City Manager who is appointed by City Council and will report to the Mayor was carried by a roll call vote of five (5) yes (Anderson, Dixon, Hare, Hutchison, and Williams), two (2) not voting (Perza and Slavin), and one (1) absent (Bonar).

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 9, 2015 PAGE 24 [City Clerk’s Office Note: Subsequent to the meeting, staff prepared an organizational chart to reflect the action of City Council (Exhibit #4 - Option E)] Mr. Slavin moved for approval of the Special Council meeting minutes of February 19, 2015, seconded by Mr. Anderson and unanimously carried. LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE REPORT - FEBRUARY 23, 2015 The Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee met on February 23, 2015 with Chairman Slavin presiding. Replenishment of Uninsured Expenses Related to the Settlement of Dover Police Department Grievances Mayor Christiansen reminded members that, during their meeting of February 9, 2015, they considered Proposed Ordinance #2015-05 - Fiscal Year 2015 Second Budget Amendment which included a proposed transfer of $300,000 to the Contingency Reserve Fund to replenish the funds expended related to the settlement of Dover Police Department grievances. Mayor Christiansen questioned why the insurance company rejected the City’s claim to cover the cost of the grievances with the police officers. Responding, Mr. Scott Koenig, City Manager, explained that the insurance company decided not to reimburse the City for these expenses because they felt that the City resolved the issue too quickly. The insurance company’s preference would have been to go beyond the grievance process to some type of suit and defend the City in accordance with their lawyers. Responding to Mayor Christiansen, Mr. Koenig stated that Council’s decision was advised by the City Solicitor. He stated his recollection that City Council felt that it was imperative to resolve these grievances as quickly as possible and avoid potential lawsuits. Mayor Christiansen questioned whether it was possible for the City to further appeal to the insurance company if it was decided not to replenish these funds via a budget amendment. In response, Mr. Koenig stated that all of the City’s appeals to the insurance company had been exercised and the insurance company’s decision was final. He explained that Mr. Glenn Mandalas, Baird Mandalas Brockstedt, LLC, was involved in the discussions with the City’s brokers. Mayor Christiansen questioned the funding sources for replenishing the General Fund. Responding, Mr. Koenig explained that Proposed Ordinance #2015-05 Fiscal Year 2015 Second Budget Amendment indicated that there was approximately $385,000 leftover from FY 2014 and staff recommended replenishing the $300,000 in the Contingency Reserve Fund and transferring $85,000 to the Capital Asset Reserve. However, the Committee recommended amending the ordinance to include the transfer of $300,000 from surplus funds into the Contingency Reserve Fund, and

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 9, 2015 PAGE 25 to allocate $60,000 of the remaining $85,000 to the Capital Asset Reserve for the President's Counsel on Public/Private Partnerships and the Future of City Hall, Weyandt Hall, Former Dover Library, and Other City Properties and $25,000 to the Parkland Reserve Fund, to be taken out of the Parkland Reserve Fund at a later date if approved by Council. Mr. Koenig advised that staff’s recommendation was to use FY2014 carryover money to replenish the reserve because the grievances were settled in FY 2014 and the majority of that expense, $250,000, was paid in FY2014. He noted that the final $50,000 payment was paid in FY 2015. Responding to Mr. Sudler, Mr. Koenig stated that, to his knowledge, this was the first scenario of a grievance of this kind with the Dover Police Department. Mayor Christiansen questioned what this $330,000, including the $30,000 legal expenses, would equate to in terms of a tax rate increase. In response, Mr. Koenig stated that, as part of the FY 2015 budget presentation, the City recognized $0.01 on the tax rate as approximately $316,000 in General Fund revenue, so $330,000 would represent approximately $0.015. Mayor Christiansen asked what $330,000, or $0.01 on the tax rate, could be used for, other than paying out legal fees. Responding, Mr. Koenig explained that adding $0.01 to the tax rate would result in an annual increase of $316,000 and this was only a one-time expense. However, he noted that $300,000 was a substantial sum of money for the City’s General Fund and could be used to purchase police cars and trash trucks, or to fund road paving programs. In response to Mayor Christiansen, Mr. Koenig confirmed that it was not possible for the City to recoup these funds. Mr. Slavin asked, based on an average home value of $150,000 and a tax rate of $0.32, how much a $0.01 tax increase would increase those tax bills and how many homes would have to be billed to raise $300,000. Mr. Slavin, Chair of the Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee, advised that the Committee considered the issue of replenishing the uninsured expenses related to the settlement of the Dover Police Department grievances. He noted that these were the grievances that they had to make a cash settlement out of City funds and the financial policy requires the replenishment of the fund. Mr. Slavin stated that the Committee forwarded this item to Council with no recommendation and noted that the item was brought forward by Mayor Christiansen and he may have additional comments. Mrs. Donna Mitchell, Controller/Treasurer, stated that $300,000 was paid for the settlement from the Contingency Reserve, which is for emergency purposes, and the proposed budget ordinance being considered for Final Reading later in the meeting would replenish those funds from the carry-forward balance from last fiscal year’s budget.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 9, 2015 PAGE 26 Responding to Mr. Perza, Mrs. Mitchell advised that if City Council votes against replenishing the funds, the $300,000 would go back into the budget balance which would then be over the required balance. While this is not prohibited, any remaining funds would carry into next year. Mr. Hare stated that, as a result, a Special Election was held that cost approximately $10,000. He asked if that money was replenished anywhere. Mrs. Mitchell stated that those expenses would have been accounted for in the carry-forward balance. Mr. Perza asked what the impact of any action would be. Mrs. Mitchell stated that City Council could decide to replenish the account or they could decide to put it somewhere else, such as a Capital Asset Reserve. Responding to Mr. Anderson, Mrs. Mitchell stated that the current contingency balance was approximately $450,000 or $460,000. She noted that, to date, snow storm expenses had been covered in the current budget and that this $300,000 was the only money taken out of the fund in the past two (2) years. Mr. Anderson asked if the balance was within policy guidelines. Mrs. Mitchell stated that the balance was below the required 2% balance and the $300,000 would bring it almost to the required level. She noted that, according to the policy, the fund would have to be replenished in the next fiscal year’s budget. Mrs. Mitchell stated that there would be no impact on the bond rating, just policy compliance. Mr. Anderson moved to replenish the Contingency Fund, as recommended by staff. The motion was seconded by Mr. Slavin and carried by a roll call vote of six (6) yes (Anderson, Dixon, Slavin, Hare, Hutchison, and Williams), one (1) no (Perza), and one (1) absent (Bonar). Civilianization of the Police Accreditation Manager Position Members were advised that the purpose of the Commission on Accreditation for Law Enforcement Agency, Inc.’s (CALEA’s) accreditation program is to improve the delivery of public safety services, primarily by: maintaining a body of standards, developed by public safety practitioners, covering a wide range of up-to-date public safety initiatives; establishing and administering an accreditation process; and recognizing professional excellence. Specifically, CALEA’s goals are to: • Strengthen crime prevention and control capabilities; • Formalize essential management procedures; • Establish fair and nondiscriminatory personnel practices; • Improve service delivery; • Solidify interagency cooperation and coordination; and • Increase community and staff confidence in the agency. The CALEA Accreditation Process is a proven modern management model; once implemented, it presents the Chief Executive Officer (CEO), on a continuing basis, with a blueprint that promotes the efficient use of resources and improves service delivery—regardless of the size, geographic location, or functional responsibilities of the agency.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 9, 2015 PAGE 27 By recent City Council votes, the Police Department’s authorized strength is 102 officers. Cpl. Jeffrey Matthews has announced his intention to retire and began his terminal leave on February 17, 2015. In lieu of filling his position with a new police officer, staff is proposing to civilianize the Accreditation Manager position, which is currently being held by a Patrolwoman First Class, whose annual salary is $62,774. The Police Department has been Nationally Accredited since 2000 and the standards set forth by CALEA are essential in maintaining its professionalism. Chief Bernat has agreed to allow the authorized strength of the department to decrease from 102 to 101 in exchange for civilianizing the Accreditation Manager position at an estimated annual salary of $45,000, which will be a substantial cost savings. Members were advised that the City Manager and Police Chief have discussed adding additional duties to the position, to include a Crime Analysis function. A job description must be proposed by the Police Department and reviewed by the Human Resources Department to appropriately place the position within the City’s pay system. Based on the request of the Police Department, it is likely that the proposed position will be titled Crime Analyst/Accreditation Manager. The job description and pay grade will be finalized after authorization from City Council to civilianize the position. Staff recommended the civilianization of the current Police Accreditation Manager position and allowing staff to revise the duties of the new position and place in the City’s pay scale in accordance with the assigned duties and responsibilities. Police Chief Paul Bernat stated that the Accreditation Manager’s position is very important; however, it does not do any enforcement so it could easily become a civilian position. He informed members that the Police Department went through the reassessment process in December and the assessors suggested the civilianization of the position. Referring to the Dover Police Department Accreditation Manager Payroll Cost Comparison Summary, Chief Bernat stated that the civilianization would result in an approximate savings of $114,730 over a 5-year period. He explained that the current Accreditation Manager was making $62,774 and the proposed salary base would be in the $45,000 range. Chief Bernat stated that he had discussed this matter with the City Manager and they agreed that the Crime Analysis/Accreditation Manager could perform the duties of both positions and would benefit the City. Chief Bernat stated that the Police Department is very good at solving crime; however, the Department is not good at predicting or stopping crime, explaining that crime analysis would enable the Department to predict and stop crime before it happens. Chief Bernat stated that the accreditation process is extremely important and must be maintained. He explained that the recent retirement of Col. Matthews provided an opportunity to save the City money by civilianizing the accreditation position instead

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 9, 2015 PAGE 28 of replacing a police officer. This proposal would reduce the Department to an authorized strength of 101 officers and increase the number of civilians from 34 to 35. Chief Bernat stated that, over a 20 year career, there would be a substantial savings. Mr. Sudler questioned what the general cost for a Crime Analysis position would be, separate from an Accreditation Manager. Responding, Chief Bernat stated that staff was working with the Human Resources Department to determine the salary ranges. Chief Bernat informed members that grant funding is available for crime analysis positions, software, etc., and they would actively seek these grant funds, which would provide additional savings. In response to Mr. Hutchison, Chief Bernat confirmed that this position would continue to assist with training. Responding to Mr. Sudler, Chief Bernat explained that this position is responsible for all of the files, ensures that policies are followed and manages the documentation to prove that the policies are being followed. He stated that the Accreditation Manager shares an office with and assists the Planning and Training Sergeant. The Committee recommended acceptance of staff’s recommendation for the civilianization of the current Police Accreditation Manager position and allowing staff to revise the duties of the new position and place it in the City’s pay scale in accordance with the assigned duties and responsibilities. By consent agenda, Mr. Hare moved for approval of the Committee’s recommendation. The motion was seconded by Mr. Anderson and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Bonar absent). Proposed Resolutions Resolution No. 2015-02 Requesting the General Assembly to Amend Article V - Miscellaneous Provisions, Section 53 - Mayor to be the Conservator of the Peace with Companion Ordinance #2015-06 Amending Chapter 62 - Law Enforcement, Article II - Police Department, Section 62-32 - Chief of Police Generally and Section 62-38 - Special Police Mayor Christiansen, referring to the previous discussion of the Replenishment of Uninsured Expenses Related to the Settlement of Dover Police Department Grievances, expressed his opinion that the selection process for the chief of police needed to be examined to guarantee transparency. He stated that the proposed amendment would establish a committee to advise the mayor on the nomination of the police chief, noting that this process was previously used to hire city managers, planners, etc. Mayor Christiansen expressed his feeling that this process would protect the citizens.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 9, 2015 PAGE 29 Responding to Mr. Hare, Mayor Christiansen stated that the proposal would not change anything related to the current discussion regarding the form of government. Mayor Christiansen explained that the proposed police chief selection committee mimicked the city manager selection committee which he and Mr. Hare participated in during their previous terms as Council members, and would guarantee transparency and that the right person is selected. In response to Mr. Hare, Mayor Christiansen explained that the police chief selection committee would select the best nominee for the position, and the mayor would present the nomination to council for approval. Mr. Hutchison asked that the committee consider deferring Proposed Resolution No. 2015-02 and No. 2015-03 until after the Regular Council Meeting of March 9, 2015. Mr. Anderson stated that a nominating committee typically provides two (2) or three (3) names and the mayor would pick from those qualified names, similar to the governor and the judicial nominating committee. He stated his understanding that Resolution No. 2015-02 proposed that the selection committee make a recommendation to the mayor; however, the mayor would not be obligated to make a selection from the list recommended by the committee. Responding to Mr. Anderson, Mayor Christiansen stated that the intent and purpose of the committee is to choose from the best and most qualified applicants that come before them. He explained that one (1) of the reasons that the Human Resources Director was included in the committee was to guarantee that equal opportunity employment regulations are followed. Mayor Christiansen stated that the committee would make the recommendation and the mayor would present that recommendation to the council for their approval. He noted that there was very little change from the current provision, other than incorporating other individuals into the process, to make sure that the process is pristine and the City is not “saddled” with legalities at a later date. Referring to the removal of the police chief, Mr. Anderson questioned why a two-thirds vote of council members was recommended rather than a majority vote. In response, Mayor Christiansen explained that he thought the two-thirds vote would guarantee the chief of police the opportunity to be removed by consent of the entire council, not just by popular demand. Mr. Hare questioned if this proposal would change the requirement for the candidate to be selected from the Police Department. Responding, Mayor Christiansen stated that the candidate would be selected from within the Department. Mr. Slavin stated that this proposed changed was “silent” in that regard. Mr. Slavin stated his opinion that this matter should be forwarded to Council, either with or without a recommendation, so that everything can be discussed on March 9th.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 9, 2015 PAGE 30 The Committee recommended forwarding Proposed Resolution No. 2015-02, Requesting the General Assembly to Amend Article V - Miscellaneous Provisions, Section 53 - Mayor to be the Conservator of the Peace with Companion Ordinance #2015-06 Amending Chapter 62 - Law Enforcement, Article II - Police Department, Section 62-32 - Chief of Police Generally and Section 62-38 - Special Police to City Council without recommendation so that it can be heard fully at the March 9, 2015 City Council meeting. Mr. Slavin noted that City Council had just passed a motion that would effectively set in motion a series of Charter amendments and ordinance clean-up, and moved to refer this item back to the Committee to allow the City Clerk to incorporate it into one (1) large Charter amendment. The motion was seconded by Mr. Hutchison and carried by a roll call vote of six (6) yes (Anderson, Dixon, Slavin, Hare, Hutchison, and Williams), one (1) no (Perza), and one (1) absent (Bonar). Resolution No. 2015-03 Requesting the General Assembly to Amend Article I - Powers of the City, Section 1.05 - Procedure to extend boundaries; and Article II - Mayor and Council, Section 5 - Council to be legislative body; size; districts; terms of mayor and councilmen; qualifications, Section 6 - Municipal election; dates, time, and place of elections, Section 7 - Nomination petitions for candidates for council and mayor, Section 9 - Meetings of mayor and council-Generally, and Section 10 - Meetings of Mayor and Council-Procedure Mrs. Traci McDowell, City Clerk, reviewed Proposed Resolution No. 2015-03. She informed members that when Charter amendments are proposed, staff likes to include amendments to clean-up language so that all amendments can be considered by the General Assembly at the same time. Mrs. McDowell stated that the change on Line 9 was a correction that was not picked up by the General Assembly the last time the Charter was amended. Referring to Lines 19-37, Mrs. McDowell explained that there was a transition period when the length of terms was changed from two (2) to four (4) years and the transitional language can now be removed. Mrs. McDowell stated that references to councilmen and councilman were changed to reflect gender neutral language. Referring to Line 57, she explained that the spelling of biennially was changed to correct a typographical error. Mrs. McDowell informed members that Mayor Christiansen suggested that the filing deadline could be the same for mayor and council, since council members who run for mayor do not have to resign their seats; however, that was not the proposed change. She explained that, for example, if Mr. Slavin were to file a petition for mayor at the 4:30 p.m. deadline and ran unopposed, he would automatically win the mayoral seat and his council seat would inevitably be vacant. The proposed amendment would make the filing deadline for mayor the last working day in January

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 9, 2015 PAGE 31 and the filing deadline for council the last working day in February, which would provide time for a vacancy to be posted for 20 days and included on the regular election ballot. Responding to Mr. Slavin, Mrs. McDowell confirmed that this amendment would prevent a special election, explaining that the City is required to post a vacancy notice 20 days in advance of the filing deadline, and this would provide adequate time to meet that requirement and include the vacancy on the regular election ballot. Mr. Hare expressed his opinion that this proposed change provides too much time and that the filing deadlines should be the same, noting that he does not like that a council member does not have to give up his/her seat to run for another office. He sated that an additional 30 days would “tie everything up.” Responding, Mrs. McDowell noted that it would only be approximately two (2) additional weeks. Mr. Hare stated that he would prefer to maintain the current deadlines or make both deadlines the end of January. Noting that people begin filing before Christmas, it was his feeling that people do not need that much time. In response to Mr. Hare, Mrs. McDowell noted that petitions have previously been filed in October, and explained that the proposed amendment included a start date of the first working day in January. Responding to Mr. Hare, Mrs. McDowell questioned whether he wanted to reinstate the requirement that members must resign their seat to run for another office. Mr. Anderson stated that he would not want to reinstate that requirement. Mr. Hare stated that he would not want to reinstate the requirement that members must resign their seat to run for another office; however, it was his feeling that the deadlines should be the same. Mr. Slavin explained that this amendment would avoid having a special election. Mrs. McDowell reminded members that when Mayor Speed left, Councilman Carey ran for mayor, and there were four (4) elections in one (1) year. This amendment could prevent a similar situation in the future. Mr. Hare suggested that the mayor’s filing deadline be the last Friday in January and council’s the first Monday in February. Responding, Mrs. McDowell explained that there would need to be a 20-day difference in order to avoid a special election. Mr. Hare stated that there was not currently a 20-day difference, and expressed his opinion that the deadlines remain the same and, if necessary, the City can have a special posting without having a special election. Mrs. McDowell explained that State election law requires that a vacancy for a mayoral or council seat be publicly posted for 20 days in advance of the filing deadline; therefore, a special election would be required if there were not 20 days to post the vacancy notice.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 9, 2015 PAGE 32 Mr. Hare stated that if Mr. Slavin were to file for mayor and run unopposed, he would lose his council seat and a vacancy notice could be posted on the first Monday in February for 20 days. Mrs. McDowell explained that by that time, absentee ballots would be prepared and people would have already voted. She noted that when the requirement to step down was eliminated, the deadlines could have been made the same; however, the proposed filing deadlines could solve a current problem. If members want one (1) filing deadline, between the first working day in January through the last working day in January for all seats, that amendment can be made. Mr. Hare stated that he would like one (1) filing deadline. Responding to Mr. Anderson, Mrs. McDowell explained that the proposed amendments beginning at Line 178 would provide clarity regarding the filling of vacancies. Mr. Anderson questioned if the proposed amendments maintained the council organization and annual meeting. In response, Mrs. McDowell informed members that Mr. Slavin had previously pointed out that there would be no annual meeting since there was no longer an annual election. Referring to Line 117, Mrs. McDowell explained that the phrase “following a regular municipal election” was removed to allow for the annual meeting on the second Monday in May each year. Mr. Anderson questioned whether council should be organized for two (2) years instead of one (1). Responding to Mr. Hare, Mrs. McDowell explained that currently the filing deadline for mayor and council are different; therefore, if Mr. Slavin had run unopposed for mayor, there was time for someone else to run for council; however, if no one ran for the vacant seat, a special election would have to be scheduled and it would run concurrent with the regular election. In response to Mr. Hare, Mrs. McDowell stated that a councilman has never run unopposed for mayor; however, since the requirement to step down was eliminated, there have been many special elections. Mr. Hare felt that there should be one (1) filing deadline for everyone, noting that there are no special deadlines for the legislature or congress. Mr. Slavin noted that another potential remedy would be to leave vacant positions vacant until the next election or council could choose to fill a vacancy by appointment. He stated that these potential remedies could be discussed during the review of the form of government.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 9, 2015 PAGE 33 Mr. Sudler stated his understanding that the best way to offset the need to have a special election, if a council member were to run unopposed for mayor, would be to make the filing deadlines the same for mayor and council. Responding, Mrs. McDowell explained that if the filing deadlines were the same, it would automatically trigger a special election because State law requires the City to post the vacancy for 20 days. Mr. Hutchison questioned the timetable for submitting the proposed amendments to the General Assembly. In response, Mrs. McDowell stated that after the adoption of the Resolutions, she generally sends everything to the General Assembly within a day or two (2); however, she noted that if Council were to make a lot of changes, it would take more time to revise the documents. Mr. Hare stated that he did not want to send this proposal to the General Assembly because it was based on a scenario that may never happen. He felt that the mayor or members of council should only be able to run for either mayor or council and, if they run for one (1), they resign the other. Mr. Anderson informed members that the requirement to step down was previously implemented because there was a mayor who wanted to eliminate competition from council. However, council removed that requirement because it did not make sense to eliminate a pool of some of the most informed people of City government from running for mayor. Mr. Anderson stated that the current proposal had merit because it would eliminate the need to hold a special election approximately two (2) weeks following the regular election, if someone holding office were to run unopposed for a separate office. He did not like the idea of leaving a seat vacant for years. Mr. Hare stated that he liked the idea of council filling a vacant term by appointment. Mrs. McDowell reminded members that this option was previously discussed when Mr. Anderson was being deployed and it was not favored. Responding, Mr. Hare stated that Mr. Anderson’s seat was still occupied at that time; if Mr. Anderson had resigned for deployment, then it might have been valid. Mr. Hare moved to recommend forwarding proposed Resolution No. 2015-03, Requesting the General Assembly to Amend Article I - Powers of the City, Section 1.05 - Procedure to Extend Boundaries; and Article II - Mayor and Council, Section 5 - Council to be Legislative Body; Size; Districts; Terms of Mayor and Councilmen; Qualifications, Section 6 - Municipal Election; Dates, Time, and Place of Elections, Section 7 - Nomination Petitions for Candidates for Council and Mayor, Section 9 - Meetings of Mayor and Council-generally, Section 10 - Meetings of Mayor and Council-procedure, and Section 13 - Vacancies; Forfeiture of Office; Filling of Vacancies, to City Council without recommendation so that it can be heard fully at the March 9, 2015 City Council meeting. The motion was seconded by Mr. Shevock.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 9, 2015 PAGE 34 Mr. Anderson suggested deferring this matter for one (1) month, pending the outcome of the discussions regarding the form of government during the City Council meeting of March 9, 2015. He stated that this would allow for all of the Charter changes to be made at the same time. Mr. Hare noted that Council would discuss all of these matters at the same time on March 9, 2015. Responding, Mr. Anderson stated that the March 9, 2015 Council meeting was going to be long, and he was not as concerned with these technical changes as the form of government. The Committee recommended forwarding proposed Resolution No. 2015-03, Requesting the General Assembly to Amend Article I - Powers of the City, Section 1.05 - Procedure to Extend Boundaries; and Article II - Mayor and Council, Section 5 - Council to be Legislative Body; Size; Districts; Terms of Mayor and Councilmen; Qualifications, Section 6 - Municipal Election; Dates, Time, and Place of Elections, Section 7 - Nomination Petitions for Candidates for Council and Mayor, Section 9 - Meetings of Mayor and Council-generally, Section 10 - Meetings of Mayor and Council-procedure, and Section 13 - Vacancies; Forfeiture of Office; Filling of Vacancies to City Council without recommendation so that it can be heard fully at the March 9, 2015 City Council meeting. Mr. Slavin noted that City Council had just passed a motion that would effectively set in motion a series of Charter amendments and ordinance clean-up, and moved to refer this item back to the Committee to allow the City Clerk to incorporate it into one (1) large Charter amendment. The motion was seconded by Mr. Hare and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Bonar absent). Mr. Slavin moved for acceptance of the Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee Report, seconded by Mr. Hare and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Bonar absent). MONTHLY REPORTS - JANUARY 2015 By motion of Mr. Hare, seconded by Mr. Anderson, the following monthly reports were accepted by consent agenda: City Assessor's Report City Manager's Report City Planner's Report Controller/Treasurer's Budget Report Economic Development Office Report Fire Chief's Report SETTING OF PROPERTY ASSESSMENT APPEALS Staff recommended that the 2015 Property Assessment Appeals be scheduled for May 26, 2015 through May 29, 2015 from 9:00 a.m. until 4:00 p.m.; June 1, 2015 through June 5, 2015 from 9:00 a.m. until 4:00 p.m.; and one (1) evening (if needed). Members were advised that the hearing times are subject to change.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 9, 2015 PAGE 35 Mr. Anderson stated that he had heard some complaints about accessibility and requested that at least one (1) evening time be set. Mr. Anderson moved to schedule at least one (1) evening to hear appeals. The motion was seconded by Mr. Slavin and unanimously carried. Mr. Hare moved for approval of the dates and times recommended by staff for the 2015 Property Assessment Appeals, seconded by Mr. Dixon and unanimously carried. FINAL READING - PROPOSED ORDINANCE The First Reading of the following proposed ordinance was accomplished during the Council Meeting of February 23, 2015: #2015-05 - Fiscal Year 2015 Second Budget Amendment Mr. Hare moved that the Final Reading of the proposed ordinance be acknowledged by title only, seconded by Mr. Anderson and unanimously carried. Mr. Hare moved for adoption of Ordinance #2015-05 (Exhibit #5), seconded by Mr. Hutchison and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Bonar absent). COUNCIL MEMBERS' ANNOUNCEMENTS Mr. Hutchison announced that the City of Dover municipal election would be held on Tuesday, April 21, 2015 between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. The polling place for all voting districts is the Elks Lodge #1903, 200 Saulsbury Road, Dover, De 19904. For more information about the candidates, absentee voting, and the election, please visit www.cityofdover.com and click on the Election 2015 button. Mr. Anderson congratulated the Center for Mental Wellness on their receipt of a major grant for suicide prevention for teenagers which will be marketed through the schools to provide services all across the State of Delaware. He noted that this is a service that is desperately needed here and he was pleased to report that one (1) of the City’s local downtown operations was playing a positive part in effecting the future of the State. Mrs. Ann Marie Townshend, Director of Planning and Community Development, advised that two (2) additional Downtown Development District public workshops would be held on Wednesday, March 11, 2015 at 11:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers. She noted that the first round of workshops was very well attended in spite of the weather. By unanimous consent, the meeting adjourned at 9:13 p.m. TRACI A. McDOWELL CITY CLERK

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 9, 2015 PAGE 36 All orders, ordinances, and resolutions adopted by City Council during their Regular Meeting of March 9, 2015, are hereby approved. ROBIN R. CHRISTIANSEN MAYOR /TM S:\AGENDAS-MINUTES-PACKETS-PRESENTATIONS-ATT&EXH\Council-Minutes\2015\03-09-2015.wpd Exhibits Exhibit #1 - Presentation - Violation of the Dangerous Building Ordinance - 312 West Loockerman Street Exhibit #2 - Presentation - Violation of the Dangerous Building Ordinance - 381 Rita-Wilma Road Exhibit #3 - Presentation - Violation of the Dangerous Building Ordinance - 383 Rita-Wilma Road Exhibit #4 - Responsibilities and Reporting Structure for the Mayor and City Manager and Continuation of Full-Time Status for the Position of Mayor - Options A, B, C, D, and E Exhibit #5 - Ordinance #2015-05 Fiscal Year 2015 Second Budget Amendment

EXHIBIT #1 Regular Council Meeting of 03/09/2015 Violation of Dangerous Building Ordinance 312 W Loockerman St Planning & Inspections Department Dover, Delaware March 9, 2015

312 W Loockerman St Case History  5 code enforcement cases since 2009 – Exterior code violations – Interior code violations  The utilities were terminated on October 22, 2012  Registered by the City as a vacant structure in March of 2009  On November 6, 2014, the City had to have a contractor make repairs to the unsafe front cellar bilco door. Outstanding Charges – $3,150 in code citations and unpaid vacant building fees.

312 W Loockerman St Demolition by Neglect (Historic District)  Demolition by Neglect is covered under Article 10, Section 3.4 of the Zoning Ordinance.  Reviewed by Historic District Commission as “Demolition by Neglect” on February 19, 2015.  Commission determined that structure is being demolished by neglect and recommended that if significant progress on repair is not made by September 2015, that the structure be demolished

Dangerous Building Code – Chapter 22 Article XI, Sec. 22-381 (5) Unfit for habitation. (9) General welfare. (10) Code violations. (12) Unoccupied buildings.

Recommended Council Action  Declare this building on this property dangerous.  Order the property repaired or demolished by September 9, 2015 by the owner or equity owner at their own risk.  Order the Building Inspector to cause the repair or demolition of the structures if not completed by the owner within 10 days of the date established by City Council.  Order the City Manager with the assistance of the City Solicitor to cause the cost of repairs or demolition to be charged against the land on which the building exists as a municipal lien or cause such cost to be added to the tax duplicate as an assessment, or to be levied as a special tax, or to be recovered in a suit at law against the owner.

EXHIBIT #2 Regular Council Meeting of 03/09/2015 Violation of Dangerous Building Ordinance 381 Rita-Wilma Rd Planning & Inspections Department Dover, Delaware March 9, 2015

381 Rita-Wilma Rd Case History  17 code enforcement cases since 2010 – Exterior code violations – no valid rental license – Junked cars – no valid building permits – Numerous grass violations – parking on the grass  The utilities were terminated on July 28, 2014  Condemned by City Staff on October 13, 2014 due to no active utilities, open code violations, unlocked doors and subjects gaining entry to the property.  Registered by the City as a vacant structure. Outstanding Charges – $1,100 in grass fees & code citations

Dangerous Building Code – Chapter 22 Article XI, Sec. 22-381 (5) Unfit for habitation. (9) General welfare. (10) Code violations. (12) Unoccupied buildings.

Recommended Council Action  Declare this building on this property dangerous.  Order the property repaired or demolished by April 9, 2015 by the owner or equity owner at their own risk.  Order the Building Inspector to cause the repair or demolition of the structures if not completed by the owner within 10 days of the date established by City Council.  Order the City Manager with the assistance of the City Solicitor to cause the cost of repairs or demolition to be charged against the land on which the building exists as a municipal lien or cause such cost to be added to the tax duplicate as an assessment, or to be levied as a special tax, or to be recovered in a suit at law against the owner.

EXHIBIT #3 Regular Council Meeting of 03/09/2015 Violation of Dangerous Building Ordinance 383 Rita-Wilma Rd Planning & Inspections Department Dover, Delaware March 9, 2015

383 Rita-Wilma Rd Case History  10 code enforcement cases since 2010 – Exterior & Interior code violations – Electric Disconnects – no rental agent – Tall grass violations – parking on the grass  The utilities were terminated on December 19, 2013  Condemned by City Staff on October 13, 2014 due to no active utilities, open code violations, broken doors and subjects gaining entry to the property.  Registered by the City as a vacant structure. Outstanding Charges – $550 in grass citations and vacant building fees.

Dangerous Building Code – Chapter 22 Article XI, Sec. 22-381 (5) Unfit for habitation. (9) General welfare. (10) Code violations. (12) Unoccupied buildings.

Recommended Council Action  Declare this building on this property dangerous.  Order the property repaired or demolished by April 9, 2015 by the owner or equity owner at their own risk.  Order the Building Inspector to cause the repair or demolition of the structures if not completed by the owner within 10 days of the date established by City Council.  Order the City Manager with the assistance of the City Solicitor to cause the cost of repairs or demolition to be charged against the land on which the building exists as a municipal lien or cause such cost to be added to the tax duplicate as an assessment, or to be levied as a special tax, or to be recovered in a suit at law against the owner.

EXHIBIT #4 - OPTION A Regular Council Meeting of 03/09/2015 RESPONSIBILITIES AND REPORTING STRUCTURE FOR THE MAYOR AND CITY MANAGER AND CONTINUATION OF FULL-TIME STATUS FOR THE POSITION OF MAYOR OPTION A (09/08/2014 LF&A): A full-time mayor's position, with consideration of changing the City's current form of government to a Mayor/Council form of government, where the city manager and chief of police would be appointed by the mayor and confirmed by City Council, and that any positions which currently report to council that are moved to report to the mayor would only be removed for cause and with council approval, was unanimously carried.

CITY OF DOVER PROPOSED ORGANIZATIONAL CHART CITIZENS OF DOVER MAYOR COUNCIL CHIEF OF POLICE CITY MANAGER POLICE DEPARTMENT CUSTOMER SERVICES CITY CLERK METER READING CUSTOMER SERVICE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT HUMAN RESOURCES FINANCE INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PROCUREMENT/INVENTORY LIBRARY FIRE ELECTRIC PLANNING & COMMUNITY ENHANCEMENT SERVICES ELECTRIC ADMINISTRATION CODE ENFORCEMENT SYSTEM OPERATIONS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT INSPECTIONS/ ELECTRIC ENGINEERING PERMITTING ELECTRIC TRANSMISSION & LIFE SAFETY DISTRIBUTION PLANNING PUBLIC WORKS RECREATON PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION TAX ASSESSOR GROUNDS SANITATION STREETS FACILITIES MANAGEMENT Appointed by the Mayor FLEET MAINTENANCE Previously reported directly to WATER/WASTEWATER ENGINEERING Council; will now report to the Mayor WATER MANAGEMENT Department Heads report directly to the City Manager WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT WATER TREATMENT PLANT

EXHIBIT #4 - OPTION B Regular Council Meeting of 03/09/2015 CITY OF DOVER FISCAL YEAR 2014 ORGANIZATION CHART CITIZENS OF DOVER MAYOR & COUNCIL COUNCIL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT MAYOR POLICE CITY SOLICITOR PLANNING & COMMUNITY CITY MANAGER CITY CLERK FINANCE FIRE TAX ASSESSOR ENHANCEMENT SERVICES LIFE SAFETY LIBRARY CUSTOMER SERVICES PROCUREMENT/INVENTORY LIBRARY CUSTOMER SERVICE CODE ENFORCEMENT METER READING INSPECTIONS/ PUBLIC WORKS PERMITTING HUMAN RESOURCES PUBLIC WORKS PLANNING ADMINISTRATION INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY GROUNDS COMMUNITY ELECTRIC DEVELOPMENT SANITATION ELECTRIC STREETS ADMINISTRATION PARKS & RECREATION FACILITIES MANAGEMENT SYSTEM OPERATIONS FLEET MAINTENANCE ELECTRIC ENGINEERING WATER/WASTEWATER ENGINEERING WASTEWATER ELECTRIC TRANSMISSION MANAGEMENT & DISTRIBUTION WATER MANAGEMENT WATER CONSTRUCTION WATER TREATMENT

EXHIBIT #4 - OPTION C Regular Council Meeting of 03/09/2015 City resident for two (2) years

CITY OF DOVER PROPOSED ORGANIZATIONAL CHART CITIZENS OF DOVER MAYOR COUNCIL CITY CLERK CHIEF OF POLICE CITY MANAGER POLICE DEPARTMENT FINANCE CUSTOMER SERVICES ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROCUREMENT/INVENTORY METER READING CUSTOMER SERVICE FIRE HUMAN RESOURCES PLANNING & COMMUNITY ENHANCEMENT SERVICES INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY CODE ENFORCEMENT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT LIBRARY INSPECTIONS/ PERMITTING ELECTRIC LIFE SAFETY PLANNING ELECTRIC ADMINISTRATION RECREATON SYSTEM OPERATIONS TAX ASSESSOR ELECTRIC ENGINEERING ELECTRIC TRANSMISSION & DISTRIBUTION PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS Appointed by the Mayor ADMINISTRATION GROUNDS Previously reported directly to SANITATION Council; will now report to the Mayor STREETS Department Heads report directly to FACILITIES MANAGEMENT the City Manager FLEET MAINTENANCE WATER/WASTEWATER Report directly to Coucil ENGINEERING WATER MANAGEMENT WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT WATER TREATMENT PLANT

Alternative Organizational Chart Submitted by Mr. Anderson on January 12, 2015

EXHIBIT #4 - OPTION D CITY OF DOVER PROPOSED ORGANIZATIONAL CHART Regular Council Meeting of 03/09/2015 CITIZENS OF DOVER MAYOR COUNCIL CONTROLLER FINANCE PROCUREMENT/INVENTORY CITY CLERK CITY CLERK’S OFFICE CITY MANAGER ECONOMIC POLICE DEPARTMENT CUSTOMER SERVICE & CITY MANAGER’S OFFICE INFORMATION METER READING FIRE HUMAN RESOURCES LIBRARY DEVELOPMENT TECHNOLOGY ECONOMIC CUSTOMER SERVICES FIRE CHIEF HUMAN RESOURCES LIBRARY CHIEF OF POLICE ASST CITY MANAGER I/T DIRECTOR DEVELOPMENT MANAGER DIRECTOR DIRECTOR MANAGER PLANNING & COMMUNITY ELECTRIC PUBLIC WORKS TAX ASSESSOR OFFICE ENHANCEMENT SERVICES ELECTRIC DIRECTOR PLANNING & COMMUNITY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR ENHANCEMENT SERVICE DIRECTOR TAX ASSESSOR ELECTRIC ADMINISTRATION PUBLIC WORKS CODE ENFORCEMENT ADMINISTRATION SYSTEM OPERATIONS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT GROUNDS ELECTRIC ENGINEERING INSPECTIONS/ SANITATION PERMITTING ELECTRIC TRANSMISSION & STREETS LIFE SAFETY Appointed by and report to Council DISTRIBUTION FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLANNING FLEET MAINTENANCE RECREATON Previously reported to the Mayor; will now WATER/WASTEWATER report to the City Manager ENGINEERING WATER MANAGEMENT Previously reported directly to Council; will WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT now report to the City Manager WATER TREATMENT PLANT Department Heads report directly to the City Manager

EXHIBIT #4 - OPTION E Regular Council Meeting of 03/09/2015 CITY OF DOVER PROPOSED ORGANIZATIONAL CHART CITIZENS OF DOVER MAYOR COUNCIL CITY MANAGER CONTROLLER FINANCE CUSTOMER SERVICE & POLICE DEPARTMENT METER READING PROCUREMENT/INVENTORY CUSTOMER SERVICES CHIEF OF POLICE MANAGER CITY CLERK PLANNING & COMMUNITY CITY MANAGER’S OFFICE ENHANCEMENT SERVICES CITY CLERK’S OFFICE ASST CITY MANAGER PLANNING & COMMUNITY ENHANCEMENT SERVICE DIRECTOR CODE ENFORCEMENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ECONOMIC INSPECTIONS/ DEVELOPMENT MANAGER PERMITTING LIFE SAFETY PLANNING ELECTRIC RECREATON ELECTRIC DIRECTOR PUBLIC WORKS ELECTRIC ADMIN PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR SYSTEM OPERATIONS PUBLIC WORKS ADMIN ELECTRIC ENGINEERING GROUNDS ELECTRIC T &D SANITATION STREETS FACILITIES MANAGEMENT FIRE FLEET MAINTENANCE FIRE CHIEF WATER/WASTEWATER ENGINEERING Previously reported to City Council; will now WATER MANAGEMENT report top the Mayor HUMAN RESOURCES WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT WATER TREATMENT Appointed by and report to Council HUMAN RESOURCES DIRECTOR PLANT Previously reported to the Mayor; will now TAX ASSESSOR OFFICE report to the City Manager TAX ASSESSOR Previously reported directly to Council; will now report to the City Manager INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY Department Heads report directly to the City Manager I/T DIRECTOR LIBRARY LIBRARY DIRECTOR

EXHIBIT #5 Regular Council Meeting of 03/09/2015 CITY OF DOVER ORDINANCE # 2015-05 2014-2015 BUDGET ORDINANCES - SECOND AMENDMENT BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: The amount hereinafter named aggregating Forty Three Million Three Hundred Ninety Nine Thousand dollars ($43,399,000) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2014 and ending June 30, 2015: GENERAL FUND REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2014-2015 2014/15 2014/15 BUDGET REVISED BEGINNING BALANCE $ 3,393,000 $ 4,361,500 REVENUES FINES AND POLICE REVENUE 629,300 629,300 INVESTMENT INCOME 40,000 40,000 LIBRARY REVENUES 71,600 71,600 KENT COUNTY BOOK REIMBURSEMENT 450,000 490,000 BUSINESS LICENSES 1,460,000 1,460,000 PERMITS AND OTHER LICENSES 1,354,200 1,354,200 MISCELLANEOUS CHARGES 53,900 53,900 POLICE EXTRA DUTY 659,500 659,500 PROPERTY TAXES 11,049,200 11,049,200 BID REVENUE 50,000 50,000 RECREATION REVENUE 148,800 148,800 FRANCHISE FEE 636,000 636,000 SANITATION FEES 2,595,600 2,595,600 RENT REVENUE - GARRISON FARM 101,400 101,400 COURT OF CHANCERY FEES 1,023,000 1,023,000 REVENUES SUBTOTAL 20,322,500 20,362,500 INTERFUND SERVICE RECEIPTS INTRAFUND SERVICE RECEIPTS WATER/WASTEWATER 1,354,900 1,371,100 INTRAFUND SERVICE RECEIPTS ELECTRIC 3,508,100 3,588,200 INTERFUND SERVICE RECEIPTS SUBTOTAL 4,863,000 4,959,300 GRANTS POLICE RELATED 124,000 124,000 POLICE PENSION GRANT 500,000 500,000 GREEN ENERGY GRANT 98,500 98,500 MISCELLANEOUS GRANTS 25,000 25,000 GRANTS SUBTOTAL 747,500 747,500 TRANSFERS FROM TRANSFER TAX 1,250,000 1,250,000 MUNICIPAL STREET AID 663,900 664,200 CIVIL TRAFFIC PENALTIES 500,000 500,000 WATER/WASTEWATER 500,000 500,000 ELECTRIC 10,000,000 10,000,000 OTHER RESERVES INCLUDING CONTINGENCY 4,000 54,000 TRANSFERS FROM SUBTOTAL 12,917,900 12,968,200 TOTAL REVENUES 38,850,900 39,037,500 TOTALS $ 42,243,900 $ 43,399,000 1

2014-2015 BUDGET ORDINANCES - SECOND AMENDMENT (CONTINUED) GENERAL FUND - EXPENDITURES AND BUDGET BALANCE 2014/15 2014/15 DEPARTMENT EXPENSES BUDGET REVISED CITY CLERK $ 383,200 $ 386,700 COUNCIL 106,600 106,600 TAX ASSESSOR 309,500 319,100 FIRE 716,100 716,100 GROUNDS MAINTENANCE 1,123,800 1,130,100 LIBRARY 1,393,100 1,422,000 RECREATION 706,400 710,800 LIFE SAFETY 504,800 534,600 CODE INFORCEMENT 418,400 420,500 PLANNING 444,100 449,400 INSPECTIONS 602,100 614,400 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 223,000 223,000 POLICE 13,986,100 14,324,400 POLICE EXTRA DUTY 712,500 712,500 STREETS 665,100 676,200 SANITATION 2,248,000 2,225,200 CITY MANAGER 592,500 595,900 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 728,700 733,800 FINANCE 947,100 966,800 PUBLIC SERVICES - ADMINISTRATION 514,800 517,700 FACILITIES MANAGEMENT 677,800 690,400 PUBLIC WORKS - ENGINEERING 192,600 193,700 PROCUREMENT & INVENTORY 535,600 538,700 FLEET MAINTENANCE 776,700 791,300 CUSTOMER SERVICES 1,040,300 1,044,600 HUMAN RESOURCES 379,700 384,300 MAYOR 74,900 74,900 DEPARTMENT SUBTOTALS 31,003,500 31,503,700 OTHER EXPENSES DEBT SERVICE 708,600 708,600 CONTRIBUTION TO DDP 70,000 70,000 MISCELLANEOUS GRANT RELATED EXPENSES 25,000 25,000 INSURANCE 724,800 724,800 RETIREES HEALTH CARE 1,636,500 1,636,500 OTHER EMPLOYMENT EXPENSES 500,000 109,900 POLICE PENSION FUND - STATE GRANT 500,000 500,000 POLICE PENSION FUND - UNFUNDED LIABILITY 655,000 655,000 UNCOLLECTIBLES - TRASH AND OTHER 50,000 50,000 STREET LIGHTS 774,500 774,500 OTHER EXPENSE SUBTOTAL 5,644,400 5,254,300 TRANSFERS TRANSFER TO CAPITAL FUND - PROJECTS 2,196,000 2,196,000 APPROPRIATION TO THE POLICE PENSION FUND - 100,000 APPROPRIATION TO THE GENERAL PENSION FUND - 543,000 TRANSFER TO CAPITAL ASSET RESERVE - 60,000 TRANSFER TO CONTINGENCY RESERVE - 300,000 TRANSFER TO PARKLAND RESERVE - 25,000 TRANSFERS SUBTOTAL 2,196,000 3,224,000 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 38,843,900 39,982,000 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE 3,400,000 3,417,000 TOTALS $ 42,243,900 $ 43,399,000 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. ADOPTED: MARCH 9, 2015 2

2014-2015 BUDGET ORDINANCES - SECOND AMENDMENT (CONTINUED) GOVERNMENTAL CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2014-2015 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: The amount hereinafter named aggregating Eight Million, Seven Hundred Fifty Five Thousand, Nine Hundred Dollars ($8,755,900) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year beginning July 1,2014 and ending June 30, 2015: REVENUES 2014/15 2014/15 BUDGET REVISED BEGINNING BALANCE $ 117,100 $ 2,324,100 BEGINNING BALANCE - LIBRARY PROJECT - 330,500 REVENUES STATE GRANTS - OTHER 153,000 208,000 PROPOSED BOND/BANK PROCEEDS - Street 2,661,100 2,675,000 LEASE PURCHASE OF FIRE AND POLICE EQUIPMENT 918,300 918,300 TRANSFER FROM GENERAL FUND FOR PROJECTS 2,196,000 2,196,000 TRANSFER FROM PARKLAND RESERVE - 104,000 TOTAL REVENUES 5,928,400 6,101,300 TOTAL BEGINNING BALANCE AND REVENUES $ 6,045,500 $ 8,755,900 EXPENSE SUMMARY 2014/15 2014/15 DEPARTMENT EXPENSES BUDGET REVISED FIRE $ 827,300 $ 827,300 GROUNDS MAINTENANCE 68,100 86,700 RECREATION 146,000 284,400 POLICE 499,100 601,700 STREETS 1,370,300 470,300 STREETS - GARRISON FARM INFRASTRUCTURE 2,586,100 5,447,600 SANITATION 256,500 256,500 CENTRAL SERVICES - 55,000 BOND/LOAN ISSUANCE COST 75,000 61,100 DEPARTMENT SUBTOTAL 5,828,400 8,090,600 TRANSFERS & MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES TRANSFER TO PARKLAND RESERVE 100,000 180,000 TRANSFER TO CAPITAL ASSET RESERVE - 330,500 TRANSFERS & MISCELLANEOUS SUBTOTAL 100,000 510,500 TOTAL EXPENSES AND TRANSFERS 5,928,400 8,601,100 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE 117,100 154,800 TOTALS $ 6,045,500 $ 8,755,900 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. ADOPTED: MARCH 9, 2015 3

2014-2015 BUDGET ORDINANCES - SECOND AMENDMENT (CONTINUED) GENERAL FUND CONTINGENCY CASH RECEIPTS/REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2014-2015 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: The amount hereinafter named aggregating Four Hundred Sixty Nine Thousand Two Hundred dollars ($469,200) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2014 and ending June 30, 2015: CASH RECEIPTS 2014/15 2014/15 BUDGET REVISED BEGINNING BALANCE $ 466,000 $ 467,300 INTEREST EARNED 1,900 1,900 TRANSFER FROM GENERAL FUND - 300,000 TOTALS $ 467,900 $ 769,200 EXPENSE SUMMARY 2014/15 2014/15 BUDGET REVISED TRANSFER TO OPERATING ACCOUNT $ - $ 50,000 CARRY FORWARD TO NEXT YEAR 467,900 719,200 TOTALS $ 467,900 $ 769,200 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. ADOPTED: MARCH 9, 2015 4

2014-2015 BUDGET ORDINANCES - SECOND AMENDMENT (CONTINUED) GENERAL CAPITAL ASSET RESERVE CASH RECEIPTS/REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2014-2015 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: The amount hereinafter named aggregating Nine Hundred Fourteen Thousand dollars ($914,000) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2014 and ending June 30, 2015: CASH RECEIPTS 2014/15 2014/15 BUDGET REVISED BEGINNING BALANCE $ 509,800 $ 521,000 RECEIPTS INTEREST EARNINGS 2,500 2,500 TRANSFER FROM GENERAL CAPITAL PROJECT FUND - 330,500 TRANSFER FROM GENERAL FUND - 60,000 TOTAL RECEIPTS 2,500 393,000 TOTALS $ 512,300 $ 914,000 EXPENSE SUMMARY 2014/15 2014/15 BUDGET REVISED CARRY FORWARD TO NEXT YEAR $ 512,300 $ 914,000 TOTALS $ 512,300 $ 914,000 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. ADOPTED: MARCH 9, 2015 5

2014-2015 BUDGET ORDINANCES - SECOND AMENDMENT (CONTINUED) PARKLAND/RECREATION RESERVE CASH RECEIPTS/REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2014-2015 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: The amount hereinafter named aggregating Three Hundred Ninety Nine Thousand Seven Hundred Dollars ($399,700) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2014 and ending June 30, 2015: OPERATING REVENUES 2014/15 2014/15 BUDGET REVISED PRIOR YEAR BALANCE $ 203,800 $ 218,700 GENERAL CAPITAL FUND APPROPRIATION 100,000 180,000 GENERAL FUND APPROPRIATION - 25,000 INTEREST INCOME 1,000 1,000 TOTALS $ 304,800 $ 424,700 OPERATING EXPENSES 2014/15 2014/15 BUDGET REVISED CURRENT YEAR BALANCE 304,800 424,700 TOTALS $ 304,800 $ 424,700 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. ADOPTED: MARCH 9, 2015 6

2014-2015 BUDGET ORDINANCES - SECOND AMENDMENT (CONTINUED) MUNICIPAL STREET AID FUND CASH RECEIPTS/REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2014-2015 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: The amount hereinafter named aggregating Six Hundred Sixty Four Thousand Three Hundred dollars ($664,300) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2014 and ending June 30, 2015: CASH RECEIPTS 2014/15 2014/15 BUDGET REVISED BEGINNING BALANCE $ 100 $ 100 STATE GRANT - OPERATIONS 663,900 664,200 TOTALS $ 664,000 $ 664,300 BUDGET SUMMARY 2014/15 2014/15 BUDGET REVISED TRANSFER TO GENERAL FUND - OPERATIONS $ 663,900 $ 664,200 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE 100 100 TOTALS $ 664,000 $ 664,300 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. ADOPTED: MARCH 9, 2015 7

2014-2015 BUDGET ORDINANCES - SECOND AMENDMENT (CONTINUED) WATER/WASTEWATER FUND REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2014-2015 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: The amount hereinafter named aggregating Fifteen Million Eight Hundred Four Thousand Nine Hundred dollars ($15,804,900) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2014 and ending June 30, 2015: 2014/15 2014/15 BUDGET REVISED BEGINNING BALANCE - WATER $ 658,400 $ 763,600 BEGINNING BALANCE - WASTEWATER (98,500) 87,500 BEGINNING BALANCE - KCSA 155,000 453,400 TOTAL BEGINNING BALANCES 714,900 1,304,500 BASE REVENUE WATER FEES 4,616,400 4,616,400 WASTEWATER FEES 3,706,800 3,706,800 WASTEWATER ADJUSTMENT FEES 2,902,600 2,902,600 GROUNDWATER INFLOW ADJUSTMENT 1,862,500 1,862,500 WATER TANK SPACE LEASING 331,900 331,900 SEWER IMPACT FEES 427,900 427,900 WATER IMPACT FEES 472,700 472,700 INTEREST - WATER 9,000 9,000 INTEREST - WASTEWATER 14,000 14,000 MISCELLANEOUS SERVICE FEE 156,600 156,600 TOTAL REVENUES 14,500,400 14,500,400 TOTAL BEGINNING BALANCES AND REVENUES $ 15,215,300 $ 15,804,900 8

2014-2015 BUDGET ORDINANCES - CONTINUED WATER/WASTEWATER FUND EXPENSES AND BUDGET BALANCES 2014/15 2014/15 DIRECT EXPENSES BUDGET REVISED ENGINEERING & INSPECTION $ 500,900 $ 502,400 WATER CONSTRUCTION 252,500 253,300 WATER DEPARTMENT 485,300 488,600 WATER TREATMENT PLANT 1,576,900 1,582,200 WASTEWATER DEPARTMENT 974,100 974,700 DIRECT EXPENDITURE SUBTOTAL 3,789,700 3,801,200 OTHER EXPENSES DEBT SERVICE - WATER 534,100 534,100 DEBT SERVICE - WASTEWATER 617,900 617,900 RETIREES HEALTH CARE 200,000 200,000 OTHER EMPLOYMENT EXPENSES 17,700 6,200 KENT COUNTY TREATMENT CHARGE 3,655,000 3,655,000 INTRAFUND SERVICE FEES 1,354,900 1,371,100 OTHER EXPENSES SUBTOTAL 6,379,600 6,384,300 TRANSFER TO GENERAL FUND FROM WATER 250,000 250,000 GENERAL FUND FROM WASTEWATER 250,000 250,000 WATER IMP AND EXT 1,200,000 1,200,000 WASTEWATER IMP AND EXT 1,800,000 1,800,000 TRANSFER TO SUBTOTAL 3,500,000 3,500,000 TOTAL EXPENSES 13,669,300 13,685,500 CURRENT YEAR BALANCES CURRENT YEAR BALANCE WATER 1,020,100 1,113,300 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE WASTEWATER (739,200) (557,400) CURRENT YEAR BALANCE KCSA 1,265,100 1,563,500 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE SUBTOTALS 1,546,000 2,119,400 TOTAL CURRENT YEAR BALANCES AND EXPENSES $ 15,215,300 $ 15,804,900 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. ADOPTED: MARCH 9, 2015 9

2014-2015 BUDGET ORDINANCES - SECOND AMENDMENT (CONTINUED) WATER/WASTEWATER IMPROVEMENT & EXTENSION FUND CASH RECEIPTS/REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2014-2015 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: The amount hereinafter named aggregating Seventeen Million, Four Hundred Forty Four Thousand, Eight Hundred dollars ($17,444,800) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2014 and ending June 30, 2015: CASH RECEIPTS 2014/15 2014/15 BUDGET REVISED PRIOR YEAR BALANCE - WATER $ 1,021,200 $ 7,588,800 PRIOR YEAR BALANCE - WASTEWATER 1,060,000 5,500,400 TOTAL BEGINNING BALANCES 2,081,200 13,089,200 RECEIPTS TRANS FROM OPERATING FUND FOR WATER 1,200,000 1,200,000 TRANS FROM OPERATING FUND FOR WASTEWATER 1,800,000 1,800,000 TRANSFER FROM WASTEWATER IMPACT FEE RESERVE 1,315,600 1,315,600 INTEREST INCOME 25,000 40,000 TOTAL RECEIPTS 4,340,600 4,355,600 TOTALS $ 6,421,800 $ 17,444,800 EXPENSE SUMMARY 2014/15 2014/15 EXPENSES BUDGET REVISED WATER $ 1,336,900 $ 7,526,500 WASTEWATER 3,277,200 7,757,300 WATER TREATMENT PLANT 38,100 38,100 TOTAL EXPENSES 4,652,200 15,321,900 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE - WATER 858,700 1,244,200 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE - WASTEWATER 910,900 878,700 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE SUBTOTALS 1,769,600 2,122,900 TOTALS $ 6,421,800 $ 17,444,800 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. ADOPTED: MARCH 9, 2015 10

2014-2015 BUDGET ORDINANCES - SECOND AMENDMENT (CONTINUED) WATER/WASTEWATER CAPITAL ASSET RESERVE CASH RECEIPTS/REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2014-2015 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: The amount hereinafter named aggregating One Million Forty One Thousand Six Hundred Dollars ($1,041,600) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2014 and ending June 30, 2015: CASH RECEIPTS 2014/15 2014/15 BUDGET REVISED BEGINNING BALANCE - WATER $ 514,000 $ 508,500 BEGINNING BALANCE - WASTEWATER 512,900 507,300 TOTAL BEGINNING BALANCES 1,026,900 1,015,800 RECEIPTS INTEREST EARNINGS - WATER 8,700 8,700 INTEREST EARNINGS - WASTEWATER 8,700 8,700 2013 BONDS UNUSED COST OF ISSUANCE FUNDS WATER - 5,300 2013 BONDS UNUSED COST OF ISSUANCE FUNDS WASTEWATER - 3,100 TOTAL RECEIPTS 17,400 25,800 TOTALS $ 1,044,300 $ 1,041,600 EXPENSE SUMMARY 2014/15 2014/15 BUDGET REVISED CURRENT YEAR BALANCE - WATER $ 522,700 $ 522,500 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE - WASTEWATER 521,600 519,100 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE SUBTOTALS 1,044,300 1,041,600 TOTALS $ 1,044,300 $ 1,041,600 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. ADOPTED: MARCH 9, 2015 11

2014-2015 BUDGET ORDINANCES - SECOND AMENDMENT (CONTINUED) WATER/WASTEWATER IMPACT FEE RESERVE CASH RECEIPTS/REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2014-2015 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: The amount hereinafter named aggregating Three Million Twenty Seven Thousand Nine Hundred Dollars ($3,027,900) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2014 and ending June 30, 2015: CASH RECEIPTS 2014/15 2014/15 BUDGET REVISED BEGINNING BALANCE - WATER $ 200,500 $ 200,200 BEGINNING BALANCE - WASTEWATER 2,820,000 2,776,400 TOTAL BEGINNING BALANCES 3,020,500 2,976,600 RECEIPTS INTEREST EARNINGS - WATER 3,400 3,400 INTEREST EARNINGS - WASTEWATER 47,900 47,900 TOTAL RECEIPTS 51,300 51,300 TOTALS $ 3,071,800 $ 3,027,900 EXPENSE SUMMARY 2014/15 2014/15 BUDGET REVISED TRANSFER TO I & E FUND FROM WASTEWATER IMPACT FEES $ 1,315,600 $ 1,315,600 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE - WATER 203,900 203,600 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE - WASTEWATER 1,552,300 1,508,700 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE SUBTOTALS 1,756,200 1,712,300 TOTALS $ 3,071,800 $ 3,027,900 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. ADOPTED: MARCH 9, 2015 12

2014-2015 BUDGET ORDINANCES - SECOND AMENDMENT (CONTINUED) WATER/WASTEWATER CONTINGENCY RESERVE CASH RECEIPTS/REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2014-2015 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: The amount hereinafter named aggregating Two Hundred Ninety Nine Thousand two Hundred dollars ($299,200) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2014 and ending June 30, 2015: CASH RECEIPTS 2014/15 2014/15 BUDGET REVISED BEGINNING BALANCE - WATER $ 105,900 $ 104,700 BEGINNING BALANCE - WASTEWATER 191,500 189,400 TOTAL BEGINNING BALANCES 297,400 294,100 RECEIPTS INTEREST EARNINGS 5,100 5,100 TOTAL RECEIPTS 5,100 5,100 TOTALS $ 302,500 $ 299,200 BUDGET SUMMARY 2014/15 2014/15 BUDGET REVISED CURRENT YEAR BALANCE - WATER 107,700 106,500 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE - WASTEWATER 194,800 192,700 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE SUBTOTALS 302,500 299,200 TOTAL EXPENSES AND CURRENT YEAR BALANCES $ 302,500 $ 299,200 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. ADOPTED: MARCH 9, 2015 13

2014-2015 BUDGET ORDINANCES - SECOND AMENDMENT (CONTINUED) ELECTRIC REVENUE FUND REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2014-2015 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: The amount hereinafter named aggregating Eighty Eight Million Nine Hundred Ten Thousand Three Hundred dollars ($88,910,300) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2014 and ending June 30, 2015: 2014/15 2014/15 BUDGET REVISED BEGINNING BALANCE $ 9,253,600 $ 6,603,800 BASE REVENUE DIRECT SALES TO CUSTOMER 78,043,000 78,043,000 UTILITY TAX 1,296,900 1,296,900 MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE 624,600 624,600 RENT REVENUE 200,000 200,000 GREEN ENERGY 130,000 130,000 INTEREST EARNINGS 12,000 12,000 TRANSFER FROM RATE STABILIZATION 2,000,000 2,000,000 TOTAL REVENUES 82,306,500 82,306,500 TOTALS $ 91,560,100 $ 88,910,300 14

2014-2015 BUDGET ORDINANCES - CONTINUED ELECTRIC FUND EXPENSES AND BUDGET BALANCE 2014/15 2014/15 EXPENSES BUDGET REVISED POWER SUPPLY $ 21,823,000 $ 21,823,000 SOLAR ENERGY 2,067,600 2,067,600 SOLAR RENEWAL ENERGY CREDITS 378,600 378,600 POWER SUPPLY MANAGEMENT 996,000 996,000 PJM CHARGES - ENERGY 11,499,800 11,499,800 PJM CHARGES - TRANSMISSION & FEES 7,234,100 7,234,100 CAPACITY CHARGES 9,958,900 9,958,900 SUB-TOTAL POWER SUPPLY 53,958,000 53,958,000 PLANT OPERATIONS 6,141,000 6,141,100 GENERATIONS FUELS 1,611,100 1,611,100 PJM SPOT MARKET ENERGY (2,232,800) (2,232,800) PJM CREDITS (486,700) (486,700) CAPACITY CREDITS (8,881,500) (8,881,500) GENERATION SUBTOTAL (3,848,800) (3,848,800) POWER SUPPLY & GENERATION SUBTOTAL 50,109,200 50,109,200 DIRECT EXPENDITURES TRANSMISSION/DISTRIBUTION 4,028,700 4,044,500 ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING 1,370,900 1,374,300 ADMINISTRATION 636,600 637,400 METER READING 267,600 267,600 SYSTEMS OPERATIONS 686,300 696,500 DIRECT EXPENDITURE SUBTOTALS 6,990,100 7,020,300 OTHER EXPENSES: UTILITY TAX 1,296,900 1,296,900 ALLOW FOR UNCOLLECTIBLES 200,000 200,000 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 246,800 246,800 RETIREES HEALTH CARE 513,300 513,300 OTHER EMPLOYMENT EXPENSES 54,200 24,000 OPEB UNFUNDED LIABILITY 1,009,800 1,009,800 GREEN ENERGY PAYMENT TO DEMEC 130,000 130,000 INTRAFUND SERVICE FEES 3,508,100 3,588,200 INTEREST ON DEPOSITS 20,000 20,000 INVENTORY WRITE OFFS 175,000 175,000 DEBT SERVICE 3,297,000 3,297,000 OTHER EXPENSES SUBTOTAL 10,451,100 10,501,000 TRANSFER TO IMPROVEMENT & EXTENSION 4,750,000 4,750,000 GENERAL FUND 10,000,000 10,000,000 TRANSFER TO SUBTOTAL 14,750,000 14,750,000 TOTAL EXPENSES 82,300,400 82,380,500 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE 9,259,700 6,529,800 TOTALS $ 91,560,100 $ 88,910,300 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. ADOPTED: MARCH 9, 2015 15

2014-2015 BUDGET ORDINANCES - SECOND AMENDMENT (CONTINUED) ELECTRIC UTILITY IMPROVEMENT AND EXTENSION FUND CASH RECEIPTS/REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2014-2015 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: The amount hereinafter named aggregating Ten Million, Nine Hundred Sixty Seven Thousand Three Hundred Dollars ($10,967,300) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2014 and ending June 30, 2015: CASH RECEIPTS 2014/15 2014/15 BUDGET REVISED BEGINNING BALANCE $ 3,362,200 $ 5,942,500 RECEIPTS TRANSFER FROM ELECTRIC 4,750,000 4,750,000 GENERAL SERVICE BILLING 250,000 250,000 INTEREST EARNINGS 24,800 24,800 TOTAL RECEIPTS 5,024,800 5,024,800 TOTALS $ 8,387,000 $ 10,967,300 EXPENSE SUMMARY 2014/15 2014/15 EXPENSES BUDGET REVISED ELECTRIC GENERATION $ 2,240,000 $ 2,739,300 TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION 1,061,700 1,804,200 ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING 1,663,100 2,800,200 TOTAL EXPENSES 4,964,800 7,343,700 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE 3,422,200 3,623,600 TOTALS $ 8,387,000 $ 10,967,300 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. ADOPTED: MARCH 9, 2015 16

2014-2015 BUDGET ORDINANCES - SECOND AMENDMENT (CONTINUED) ELECTRIC UTILITY CONTINGENCY RESERVE CASH RECEIPTS/REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2014-2015 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: The amount hereinafter named aggregating Eight Hundred Twenty Five Thousand dollars ($825,000) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2014 and ending June 30, 2015: CASH RECEIPTS 2014/15 2014/15 BUDGET REVISED BEGINNING BALANCE $ 820,100 $ 819,100 RECEIPTS INTEREST EARNINGS 5,900 5,900 TOTAL RECEIPTS 5,900 5,900 TOTALS $ 826,000 $ 825,000 EXPENSE SUMMARY 2014/15 2014/15 BUDGET REVISED CURRENT YEAR BALANCE 826,000 825,000 TOTALS $ 826,000 $ 825,000 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. ADOPTED: MARCH 9, 2015 17

2014-2015 BUDGET ORDINANCES - SECOND AMENDMENT (CONTINUED) ELECTRIC UTILITY DEPRECIATION RESERVE SOURCES AND USE OF FUNDS FOR 2014-2015 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: The amount hereinafter named aggregating Ten Million Fifteen Thousand Three Hundred dollars ($10,015,300) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2014 and ending June 30, 2015: CASH RECEIPTS 2014/15 2014/15 BUDGET REVISED BEGINNING BALANCE $ 9,898,000 $ 9,915,100 INTEREST EARNINGS 100,200 100,200 TOTALS $ 9,998,200 $ 10,015,300 BUDGET SUMMARY 2014/15 2014/15 BUDGET REVISED CURRENT YEAR BALANCE 9,998,200 10,015,300 TOTALS $ 9,998,200 $ 10,015,300 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. ADOPTED: MARCH 9, 2015 18

2014-2015 BUDGET ORDINANCES - SECOND AMENDMENT (CONTINUED) ELECTRIC UTILITY FUTURE CAPACITY RESERVE SOURCES AND USE OF FUNDS FOR 2014-2015 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: The amount hereinafter named aggregating Ten Million One Hundred Thirty Six Thousand Nine Hundred dollars ($10,136,900) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2014 and ending June 30, 2015: CASH RECEIPTS 2014/15 2014/15 BUDGET REVISED BEGINNING BALANCE $ 10,076,200 $ 10,064,400 INTEREST EARNINGS 72,500 72,500 TOTALS $ 10,148,700 $ 10,136,900 BUDGET SUMMARY 2014/15 2014/15 BUDGET REVISED CURRENT YEAR BALANCE 10,148,700 10,136,900 TOTALS $ 10,148,700 $ 10,136,900 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. ADOPTED: MARCH 9, 2015 19

2014-2015 BUDGET ORDINANCES - SECOND AMENDMENT (CONTINUED) ELECTRIC UTILITY INSURANCE STABILIZATION RESERVE SOURCES AND USE OF FUNDS FOR 2014-2015 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: The amount hereinafter named aggregating Seven Hundred Forty Two Thousand Eight Hundred dollars ($742,800) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2014 and ending June 30, 2015: CASH RECEIPTS 2014/15 2014/15 BUDGET REVISED BEGINNING BALANCE $ 738,300 $ 737,500 INTEREST EARNINGS 5,300 5,300 TOTALS $ 743,600 $ 742,800 BUDGET SUMMARY 2014/15 2014/15 BUDGET REVISED CURRENT YEAR BALANCE 743,600 742,800 TOTALS $ 743,600 $ 742,800 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. ADOPTED: MARCH 9, 2015 20

2014-2015 BUDGET ORDINANCES - SECOND AMENDMENT (CONTINUED) ELECTRIC UTILITY RATE STABILIZATION RESERVE SOURCES AND USE OF FUNDS FOR 2014-2015 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: The amount hereinafter named aggregating Ten Million Five Hundred Forty One Thousand Five Hundred dollars ($10,541,500) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2014 and ending June 30, 2015: CASH RECEIPTS 2014/15 2014/15 BUDGET REVISED BEGINNING BALANCE $ 10,507,300 $ 10,465,800 INTEREST EARNINGS 75,700 75,700 TOTALS $ 10,583,000 $ 10,541,500 BUDGET SUMMARY 2014/15 2014/15 BUDGET REVISED TRANSFER TO ELECTRIC FUND $ 2,000,000 $ 2,000,000 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE 8,583,000 8,541,500 TOTALS $ 10,583,000 $ 10,541,500 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. ADOPTED: MARCH 9, 2015 21

2014-2015 BUDGET ORDINANCES - SECOND AMENDMENT (CONTINUED) WORKERS COMPENSATION FUND CASH RECEIPTS/REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2014-2015 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: The amount hereinafter named aggregating One Million Six Hundred Twenty Four Thousand Four Hundred dollars ($1,624,400) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2014 and ending June 30, 2015: OPERATING REVENUES 2014/15 2014/15 BUDGET REVISED PRIOR YEAR BALANCE $ 1,135,000 $ 1,123,300 INTEREST INCOME 10,600 10,600 PREMIUM FROM CITY 490,500 490,500 TOTALS $ 1,636,100 $ 1,624,400 OPERATING EXPENSES 2014/15 2014/15 BUDGET REVISED PROGRAM EXPENSES/SUPPLIES - CLAIMS $ 450,000 $ 450,000 INSURANCE 92,600 92,600 BANK FEES 600 600 STATE OF DEL - SELF INSURANCE TAX 37,000 37,000 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 57,000 57,000 TOTAL EXPENSES 637,200 637,200 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE 998,900 987,200 TOTALS $ 1,636,100 $ 1,624,400 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. ADOPTED: MARCH 9, 2015 22

1 2014-2015 BUDGET ORDINANCES - SECOND AMENDMENT (CONTINUED) NO CHANGES IN 2ND BUDGET AMENDMENT ORDINANCE 2 COMMUNITY TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT FUND 3 CASH RECEIPTS/REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2014-2015 4 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: 5 The amount hereinafter named aggregating One Million, Eight Hundred Twenty One Thousand Eight 6 Hundred Dollars ($1,821,800) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from 7 current revenues and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government 8 for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2014 and ending June 30, 2015: 9 OPERATING REVENUES 10 2014/15 2014/15 11 BUDGET REVISED 12 PRIOR YEAR BALANCE $ 78,900 $ 143,500 13 GRANTS REVENUE - DELDOT 500,000 1,677,800 14 INTEREST INCOME 500 500 15 TOTAL REVENUES 500,500 1,678,300 16 TOTALS $ 579,400 $ 1,821,800 17 OPERATING EXPENSES 18 2014/15 2014/15 19 BUDGET REVISED 20 PROGRAM EXPENSES - DELDOT $ 500,000 $ 1,677,800 21 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 500,000 1,677,800 22 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE 79,400 144,000 23 TOTALS $ 579,400 $ 1,821,800 24 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make 25 interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any 26 department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. 27 ADOPTED: MARCH 9, 2015 23

2014-2015 BUDGET ORDINANCES - SECOND AMENDMENT (CONTINUED) LIBRARY GRANT FUND CASH RECEIPTS/REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2014-2015 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: The amount hereinafter named aggregating Three Hundred Twenty Six Thousand two Hundred dollars ($326,200) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2014 and ending June 30, 2015: OPERATING REVENUES 2014/15 2014/15 BUDGET REVISED BEGINNING BALANCE $ 17,300 $ 44,800 STATE GRANT 274,100 278,900 FEDERAL GRANT - 2,500 TOTALS $ 291,400 $ 326,200 OPERATING EXPENSES 2014/15 2014/15 BUDGET REVISED FURNITURE $ 2,000 $ 15,100 OFFICE SUPPLIES 24,000 28,000 PRINTING/DUPLICATING 8,900 14,000 AUDIO VISUAL SUPPLIES 74,000 75,100 BOOKS 128,900 132,600 PROGRAM EXPENSES/SUPPLIES 28,000 29,900 POSTAGE 100 100 TRAINING/CONF/FOOD/TRAV 3,500 3,500 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES - 900 OFFICE EQUIPMENT/REPAIRS & MAINT 2,000 6,000 COMPUTER HARDWARE 2,700 - OTHER EQUIP - LEASE - 1,200 SUBTOTAL EXPENSES STATE GRANTS 274,100 306,400 PROGRAM EXPENSES/SUPPLIES - 2,500 SUBTOTAL EXPENSES FEDERAL GRANTS - 2,500 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE 17,300 17,300 TOTALS $ 291,400 $ 326,200 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. ADOPTED: MARCH 9, 2015 24

2014-2015 BUDGET ORDINANCES - SECOND AMENDMENT (CONTINUED) POLICE GRANTS FUND CASH RECEIPTS/REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2014-2015 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: The amount hereinafter named aggregating Six Hundred Eight Thousand Five Hundred dollars ($608,500) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2014 and ending June 30, 2015: OPERATING REVENUES 2014/15 2014/15 BUDGET REVISED BEGINNING BALANCE $ 77,200 $ 172,100 STATE AND FEDERAL GRANTS 339,000 436,400 TOTALS $ 416,200 $ 608,500 OPERATING EXPENSES 2014/15 2014/15 BUDGET REVISED CADET PROGRAM SALARIES AND BENEFITS - 17,900 POLICE EQUIPT & PROG SUPP 156,000 317,900 TECHNOLOGY EQUIPMENT 50,000 47,800 CELL PHONE CHARGES 15,000 15,000 TRAINING 32,000 45,000 AUDIT FEES 1,000 1,000 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 6,000 10,200 SUBTOTAL EXPENSES 260,000 454,800 OPERATING TRANSFERS-OUT 124,000 124,000 SUBTOTAL FINANCING USES 124,000 124,000 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE 32,200 29,700 TOTALS $ 416,200 $ 608,500 The above budget represents the combination of all State & Federal Grants. The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. ADOPTED: MARCH 9, 2015 25

2014-2015 BUDGET ORDINANCES - SECOND AMENDMENT (CONTINUED) CDBG FUND CASH RECEIPTS/REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2014-2015 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: The amount hereinafter named aggregating Two Hundred Eighty Six Thousand Three Hundred dollars ($286,300) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2014 and ending June 30, 2015: OPERATING REVENUES 2014/15 2014/15 BUDGET REVISED BEGINNING BALANCE $ - $ 2,100 STATE AND FEDERAL GRANTS 235,000 284,200 TOTALS $ 235,000 $ 286,300 OPERATING EXPENSES 2014/15 2014/15 BUDGET REVISED Prior year Closing cost/down payment program - 200 Prior year MHDC home repair - 2,000 Prior year Elizabeth W Murphey School - 1,200 Prior year Ncall Research Inc. - 2,300 Prior year Milford housing H/O rehab - 3,000 Current year closing cost/down payment program 102,800 102,800 Current year Dover interfaith ministry 27,500 27,500 Current year Elizabeth W Murphey school 50,000 50,000 Current year Ncall Research Inc. 7,700 7,700 Current year salaries 47,000 87,500 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 235,000 284,200 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE - 2,100 TOTALS $ 235,000 $ 286,300 The above budget represents the combination of all State & Federal Grants. The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. ADOPTED: MARCH 9, 2015 26