CCW Minutes and Attachment 1

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE The Council Committee of the Whole was held by video conference on June 9, 2020 at 6:00 p.m., with Council President Hare presiding. Council members present via video or telephone were Mr. Anderson, Mr. Sudler, Mr. Neil, Mr. Slavin, Mr. Cole, Mr. Polce, Mr. Taylor, and Mr. Lindell. Civilian members present via video or telephone for their Committee meetings were Mr. Caldwell and Col. Dix, Retired, (Parks, Recreation, and Community Enhancement), Ms. Maucher (Utility), and Mr. Contant and Mr. Shevock (Legislative, Finance, and Administration). PARKS, RECREATION, AND COMMUNITY ENHANCEMENT COMMITTEE The Parks, Recreation, and Community Enhancement Committee met with Chairman Anderson presiding. Adoption of Agenda Mr. Neil moved for approval of the agenda, seconded by Mr. Taylor and unanimously carried. Presentation by Delaware Union – Youth Soccer Program and Potential Grant Mr. Dan Simmons and Mr. Dwayne Henry, Jr., Delaware Union, reviewed their presentation titled “Delaware Union,” located in the meeting packet. Mr. Simmons stated they were trying to come up with plans that run at little to no cost for children in Dover. Mr. Simmons noted that they understood that there is a recreational program running through the City’s Parks and Recreation Department currently and they would like to help supplement some of the programs that are currently running. Mr. Henry stated that they are trying to pool all the existing resources that are out there, the City of Dover parks program, their program, and connecting all of that together to give a good model and structure for the kids to be able to participate in. Mr. Simmons noted that part of what they are looking to do is develop a relationship with the City Parks program and help with the coaches, the players that are already existing there, and then see if there is a way that they can help add to the numbers of kids that are already participating in the City’s program. Mr. Simmons noted that they are licensed coaches through the U.S. Soccer Federation. He stated they are involved with players of all ages and even participate and run a program for special needs. Mr. Cole stated that he knew that the Union came to City Council about five years ago and that based on his day job and this job, he is open to any type of partnership and any type of sport. Mr. Cole asked what the specific ask was from the Delaware Union and noted that he knew the City’s Parks and Recreation program is very good. Mr. Simmons noted that he was the one who spoke at the Council meeting five years ago and at the time he was not 100% sure what they were looking for because it was all very new that they were being removed from Schutte Park. Mr. Simmons stated with the addition of several programs in the area, they have found their place as being able to provide coaching opportunities. He also stated for the most part, people have a lot of coaches and parents that are willing to be involved with limited knowledge and resources, Delaware Union is looking to supplement those resources and as far as the ask goes, it is just to be able to get involved. He noted it is not so much they are looking for any money or looking for fields, it is how they can get involved and help bring players into the City’s programs, find players, help the players that are in the City’s programs that may be interested in taking the next step out of recreational soccer and into a travel program or ones that may be looking for additional training. He noted they are really just hoping to introduce themselves again and open the door for communication and potential future programming.

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING OF JUNE 9, 2020 PAGE 2 Mr. Neil provided background history of how Major League Baseball actually spurred the movement towards soccer in the country. Mr. Neil stated he saw nothing for the females listed in the presentation. He noted that becomes an extremely important part of the program, if it does not, working with disabilities is marvelous. Mr. Neil stated he thought all they are asking for is permission to meet with City Staff and to see how they may help and thought that was great. He stated he would support them talking with the recreation staff to see how they may utilize their services. Responding to Mr. Neil, Mr. Simmons stated they do not differentiate between males and females. He noted oftentimes they put them side by side, one of the things they have learned over the years is as kids are maturing, typically it is females that mature faster, so they are actually able to keep up and push around some of the boys. He noted that they look to incorporate males, females, all ages, all athletic ability. Mr. Henry stated for both groups it is a lifelong or youth long activity that they are able to participate in. Mr. Henry noted under pathways there are three different possibilities for a kid, it is more about opening those doors and avenues. He noted they are open to offering stuff in the winter as well, but for the kids that really enjoy coming out there playing, they want to be able to offer additional programs throughout the year, give them possibilities and open doors that they might not have had before. Mr. Neil asked if there was any action that needed to be taken or if this was just the beginning of a discussion and then they can bring it back to see whatever the specific ask is. Responding to Mr. Neil, Mr. Anderson stated that it is for consideration, that way the discussion can formally be endorsed and be opened, and then they will see what proposal comes out of it. Mr. Polce stated as a former Olympic Development Program (ODP), travel and then collegiate soccer player, he knew the process fairly well. He noted that as they stand, the Dover Parks and Recreation program has a full census. Mr. Polce asked if the long term goal of Delaware Union is to identify players that might have a higher skill set and then attempt to have those players matriculate to be part of Delaware Union, to open up further avenues for travel. Responding, Mr. Simmons stated, potentially, but he would not want to be viewed as somebody who is just coming in and trying to take players from recreation programs because there is certainly a tremendous need for recreation programs. He noted they do have many instances where kids just become bored with a certain level and they look for something else. Mr. Polce stated that Delaware Union has a few locations and facilities for training, but asked if part of the conversation is also about leveraging or maximizing resource allocation through a partnership with the City of Dover, and if the goal is to establish a greater understanding of shared space, or shared training space. Responding, Mr. Simmons stated at this time, they have been using space at the County facility on New Burton Road, for a couple of years. He noted he started out running programs for them and helping assist with programs there in exchange for space, but at this time, they are not asking for space. Mr. Simmons noted that if the City said that they would like to offer clinics and they want to run it at Schutte park or at any of the other parks, and would like Delaware Union to come do that, that would certainly be something that they would look to work with the City to do. He noted that they turned over the fields that they had on Lewis Drive because it became cost prohibitive for them to continue to maintain those fields with the new program opening up. He stated that there are four programs running in the County area right now and not having that many kids, they were not able to continue to really fund that park without raising their fees. He noted that they have two teams that they are starting out with right now, so the kids will not have to leave the Dover area. There are certainly enough kids in this area, but the struggle is just giving those kids

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING OF JUNE 9, 2020 PAGE 3 direction and providing them a pathway and helping the families understand the benefits that they can provide. Responding to Mr. Lindell, Mr. Simmons stated that five years ago or recently, since this has been on the agenda, there have been conversations with the City’s Parks and Recreation Department. Mr. Simmons noted that they have tried and personally felt like the Parks and Recreation Department did not want anything to do with them. He noted it has been sluggish, as a go to try to develop a relationship, but they reached out a couple of times. Mr. Simmons noted that he did not feel that what they are trying to do has been well received and that could honestly be on their part, since they have not really laid out the pathway that they are presenting today. Mr. Simmons noted that he spoke with Mr. Sudler regarding, a U.S. soccer organization and their availability to get grants. He noted that sometimes those grants are available to certain demographics or areas of the country. He noted that was how they would be looking to hopefully fund programs for free or very little cost. Mr. Lindell stated the issue might be just prior history, maybe there might not be the trust there because there has been history where programs come in and peel kids off of a program, that up to this point they are filling the program pretty well. He noted that he has no problem with furthering discussions as far as offering more to the athletes that are living within City limits, who choose to participate in City programs. He stated that he does not want to sacrifice the hard work of the Parks and Recreation Department either and that maybe another discussion with individuals in Parks and Recreation Department or maybe with Mr. Steve Pickering might be warranted. Mr. Lindell stated that he would be happy to volunteer and sit in on the meeting just to listen as well. He stated that if it is something that can benefit both groups and help their kids at the same time, he is all for it. Mr. Anderson stated that there were a lot of changes over the last five years, which may have inhibited necessary discussions. He noted that there has been a lot of turnover in leadership and it probably was difficult to open up channels of communication when they were trying to focus on getting moved, needs assessments, and park plans, so there is new opportunity. Mr. Sudler stated that he supported this initiative and stated the Mr. Lindell was correct, they do not need to reinvent the wheel, however, nor diminish the efforts of the City and employees in that department. Mr. Sudler stated he believes that Delaware Union’s service can fill a gap that they may not be aware of. Mr. Sudler suggested that they look at some of the programs that were mentioned on the Social Action Commission of Mount Zion A.M.E. Church that was submitted in 2014. He stated they may need to also assess which programs or which one of the programs that are on both these surveys that they have officially integrated into their comprehensive plan via City Council vote in the past, which programs, activities that they could help bring to light. Col. Dix suggested they hold four or five summer clinics at three or four of the City’s parks to initiate their program and try to stimulate people, getting into soccer rather than trying to get involved with the City’s various established teams. He noted then that way they build on that foundation. Mr. Sudler moved to refer this proposal to stand for further development. The motion was seconded by Mr. Taylor and unanimously carried.

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING OF JUNE 9, 2020 PAGE 4 Evaluation of Requests for Proposals - Architectural and Engineering Services for Five Recreation Projects with Costs (RFP #20-0024CM) Mr. Matthew Harline, Assistant City Manager, reviewed the background and analysis regarding the evaluation of request for proposals for Architectural and Engineering Services for Five Recreation Projects with Costs (RFP #20-0024CM). Staff recommended 1. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and sign an agreement with Whitman, Requardt & Associates, LLP of Wilmington DE/Baltimore, MD, to provide architectural and engineering services to the City of Dover for five recreation facilities; and 2. If the Committee/Council prefers the option for a design with a modular building, they can choose the Optional proposal for $20,000 deduction. Responding to Mr. Neil, Mr. Harline stated the building's use would be for programming, an office space, and for exterior and interior bathrooms. Mr. Harline stated the direction to the engineers is to incorporate the mechanical part of the splash pad with the building. There is room for both, and they believe there is also room in that northern part of Dover Park, near the entrance off of White Oak Drive. He stated that they believe that there is also room there for a Can-Do Playground for all three of those items. Mr. Harline stated the design and public participation process will be there for any group to participate, including IMA. He noted that the IMA also approached public schools and they have an agreement, or they were working on an agreement to do programming in Towne Point. Mrs. Donna Mitchell, City Manager, stated the building is not figured out yet, part of the design is to have workshops and find out all the different components they are going to be talking publicly so while they know in their mind they need bathrooms, an office space, and certain parts, they still do not have all that. She noted that is part of what this engineering is going to do, it is still not all tied together yet. Mrs. Mitchell stated they have asked in the RFP for certain components to be designed and engineered, so it is going to be based on discussions as to what they pull together in each one of those options and that has not been done yet. She noted part of the RFP was four workshops for those planning sessions. Mrs. Mitchell noted that this was put through under the emergency order as well, but they found a mistake in the action form, so she asked Mr. Harline to put it on the agenda and just bring it through committee. Mr. Sudler stated that it sounded like it is a workshop to revisit those programs and those activities that might be a good fit for constructing a facility, that would host or be able to host the programs and activities that were being desirable by the applicants or constituents in that area, or those who filled out the survey. Mr. Sudler asked Mrs. Mitchell if that was correct. Responding to Mr. Sudler, Mrs. Mitchell stated she met with the IMA membership a couple of different times to discuss the building, what they would like to see in the building, and what we could afford in the building. She stated part of it is they wanted an industrial kitchen and they wanted a lot more than we were looking to put in this building and the size of the building. She stated that they came to understand that they are going to do a certain size of building. They were increasing the size so they can do more programming in it, but she told them that they would not be doing an industrial kitchen, but will be putting a building together to get the citizens input and that will be part of the workshop, but it was not going to be what they were looking for. Mr. Sudler agreed and did not think there should be an industrial kitchen in there, but that was just his personal opinion. He stated that if they tailored it towards the community and they have said they want it, then he thought it was reasonable. Mr. Sudler stated the workshops should solely focus on the data gathered so that they bring some validity to the data that the City has gathered, so they know that they have heard their

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING OF JUNE 9, 2020 PAGE 5 voice and that their decisions are based off of what they have expressed with some flexibility. He noted that everything has to be within the parameters or scope of what the constituents and applicants wanted. Mr. Harline noted that one of the advantages of Whitman, Requardt & Associates, LLP was that they did the Dover Park Master Plan, so they already know about that. Mr. Anderson stated that Council endorsed the building at Dover Park at least three different times, and it is including the latest time with the master plan they voted for the option that included a building, but the school opened up some possibilities. He noted that it saved them money and allows them a lot more flexibility so that everything does not have to be done at one location. Responding to Mr. Taylor, Mr. Harline stated that the travel costs were not listed, which was one of the things that they did not particularly like about the proposal, but has asked them to include all the costs. Mr. Harline also stated that they made it clear in the proposal that they were looking for, which included participation with minority or women owned business enterprises. Whiteman, Requardt & Associates, LLP was the only one who came forward with a proposal there. He stated they will be working with Desmond A Baker and Associates. Responding to Col. Dix, Mr. Anderson stated that the five project items that Col. Dix was referencing were from different plans and cost savings. Mr. Anderson noted all of those plans have been filled together and have been rolled into one project. Responding to Col Dix, Mr. Harline gave the following updated regarding different projects: • The splash pad, Can-Do playground, indoor classroom or restrooms would be included. • They were doing a skate park in Schutte Park, but not the linear skate facility that was proposed in one of the original versions of the Dover Park Master Plan. • They were planning to still do a community garden, but he did not think that would require engineered designs. • The 10 bench parks were still planned, but it is not part of the engineering design and that they were already working on the pond enhancement. • He did not remember wildlife enhancements, bird houses, bat boxes, and view scopes as a part of the plan, but that it was not something they would have in the engineering plans, but they are still very possible. Mr. Sudler asked if they reached out to the Rotary Club regarding the Can-Do park. He noted that the Rotary Club stated in the past they contributed to as much as $100,000 or $400,000. Responding to Mr. Sudler, Mr. Harline stated that it was reported that they pursued that option and was not successful. He noted that it is both in the budget and in discussions with Mr. Robin Eaton, Director of Parks and Recreation, it was their intention to try and seek donations. Mr. Harline stated that he did not personally make contact with the Rotarians. He stated for the RFP, they have City money for, but the for the construction he would certainly like to try and purse additional funds. Mr. Sudler asked Mr. Harline to reach back out to them and thought that they definitely need to exercise that option because it is a grassroot initiative and also gives them something to be part of and proud of.

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING OF JUNE 9, 2020 PAGE 6 Mr. Caldwell voiced his concerns regarding the cost of the engineering plans for the total project at the end. He asked if they are keeping tabs on what it is going to involve, and how much. Responding to Mr. Caldwell, Mr. Harline stated that the prices before the committee were the ones they presented with the first version, but in the Committee Action Form it was incorrect, so those prices have not gone up. He noted that they believe that the bid by Whitman, Requardt & Associates, LLP is going to be the most comprehensive and maintainable and will be able to stay within those boundaries. Mr. Cole asked if there was a stipulation when the old building was torn down and if there were funds put in place. Mrs. Mitchell stated that there were funds put into the reserve account which is partially what they had been using to do these projects. Responding to Mr. Cole, Mr. Slavin stated that he recalls that it was put into the reserve and they did put it into the master planning for this site. Mr. Neil clarified that the Can-Do park was the presentation by the Wilmington Rotary and it was his understanding that the local Rotary Club did not want to participate in it at that time. He noted that does not mean they may not decide that they will want to participate now, but it came from Wilmington. Mr. Neil agreed with Mr. Sudler that they should go back to the Dover Rotary Club. Mr. Sudler moved to recommend approval of Staff’s recommendation as presented, seconded by Mr. Hare and unanimously carried. Mr. Neil moved for adjournment of the Parks, Recreation, and Community Enhancement Committee meeting. The motion was seconded by Mr. Anderson and unanimously carried. Meeting adjourned at 7:15 p.m. UTILITY COMMITTEE The Utility Committee met with Chairman Cole presiding. Adoption of Agenda Mr. Sudler moved for approval of the agenda, seconded by Mr. Neil and unanimously carried. Annual Engineering Consultant's Report on the Operation and Maintenance of the Electric System - Fiscal Year 2019 Ms. Lori Peddicord, Controller/Treasurer, presented the Annual Engineering Consultant’s Report on the Operation and Maintenance of the Electric System – Fiscal Year 2019. Staff recommended acceptance of the report. Mr. Neil moved to recommend acceptance of the report, as recommended by Staff. The motion was seconded by Mr. Slavin and unanimously carried. The motion for adjournment of the Utility Committee meeting was unanimously carried. Meeting adjourned at 7:22 p.m.

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING OF JUNE 9, 2020 PAGE 7 LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE The Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee met with Chairman Lindell presiding. Adoption of Agenda Mr. Neil moved for approval of the agenda, seconded by Mr. Taylor and unanimously carried. Downtown Dover Partnership Parking Solutions Ms. Diane Laird, Executive Director of the Downtown Dover Partnership (DDP), Mr. Chris Robocker, DDP Parking Committee, and Mr. Jed Hatfield, President of Colonial Parking Inc., reviewed the background information for the Downtown Dover Partnership (DDP) Parking Solutions. The Partnership recommended to proceed with the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to design and implement a comprehensive parking solution. Responding to Mr. Sudler, Mr. Hatfield stated that they were thinking there will probably be about half a dozen people dedicated to the downtown Dover Program. He noted until they really develop the details of the program they will not know what the full staffing looks like, but that is their expectation that would be the right number to manage the on-street parking which is somewhere around 250 spaces give or take, as well as the off-street parking lots that are currently managed by the Partnership. Responding to Mr. Sudler, Mr. Hatfield stated that he did not know percentages off the top of his head regarding the diversity within Colonial Parking, Inc., but that they have a very diverse workforce in Wilmington. He noted that many of them, unfortunately, are furloughed right now because of what COVID has done to the parking market in Wilmington, Delaware. He noted that they have a lot of diversity in ethnicity, but he did not know diversity in religion. Mr. Anderson stated that they had a good comprehensive solution with some online options, but people are mobile when they are parking. He encouraged Mr. Hatfield to think about an app. Mr. Hatfield stated that from Colonial Parking's perspective, they have worked with a variety of apps. He noted that there are some that help a person find a place to park and there is one in particular, SpotHero, that they have done some work with. He noted that there are other apps that actually are their payment methods Responding to Mr. Anderson, Mr. Hatfield stated that they would be managing the permits too. He noted that they have outlined it in their response to the RFP that they would be managing the off-street parking lots, as well as the on-street parking. Part of the management of the off-street parking lots would be managing the monthly parkers. Mr. Hatfield stated they would manage those permits a little differently than is currently being done, in that they would register monthly parkers. They would go into their database and customer care system, and then they would just continue to get billed monthly for as long as they wanted to continue to park in their selected facility. Responding to Mr. Taylor, Mr. Hatfield stated that they do have some electric vehicle charging facilities in some of their parking facilities in Wilmington. Mr. Hatfield stated his expectation is during the development of the downtown parking program, they would evaluate the demand for electric vehicle charging and if there is demand for it, then yes, they would be prepared to install and maintain that equipment as long as there is a demand for it to use.

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING OF JUNE 9, 2020 PAGE 8 Mr. Neil expressed his concerns regarding seniors who do not have the apps. He asked with the smart parking, is there going to be places for seniors to be able to come in and use real U.S. money or a credit card if they wish. He noted that often he cannot find parking, but he can in the E-ZPass lots and that the solution that they have presented to them is the best solution because they will have those spots that can be open and they can still satisfy what E-ZPass needs in order to stay in the downtown area. Mr. Neil noted that he was very impressed with this program. He noted that he expects that there is one thing that they will have to commit with and that they are going to be using City streets for this process and that it is going to be a long term process so they can get their money back in what they are going to invest in them. Responding to Mr. Contant, Mr. Hatfield stated that yes, effectively, Colonial would take control to the extent that they would be retained by the Downtown Dover Partnership to manage those parking assets. He noted that really the control would be moving from the City to the Partnership and then Colonial Parking would be engaged by the Partnership. Mr. Hatfield stated that they would not be directly in control and authorized, but rather they would be working on behalf of the Partnership to manage the parking. Mr. Lindell stated that it is a big decision to make because of the fact that once they turn over control of streets and such, Council will be held to the decisions that are made on those streets and they are giving up some of that accountability. Mr. Lindell asked if the Dover Police Department has any response or have they been approached by the plan or with the plan. Responding to Mr. Lindell, Ms. Laird stated that the solution is yet to be developed and they encourage all Council members and members of the public to respond. She noted that she has had a discussion with the Police Chief and invited him to become a part of the process. She invited everyone to be a part of the solution so that nobody is surprised about what the final design looks like. Mr. Lindell stated last year around this time they were talking about a parking garage and originally when they talked about it they were talking about a space problem, but now they are not talking about a space problem. He stated that there are some concerns from his constituents regarding how this plan is different from the parking garage and because they put money into different things before. Responding to Mr. Lindell, Ms. Laird stated that this is an interim solution to allow them to better assess and manage the parking opportunities that they have without investing in a much more complex and expensive solutions of the parking garage. She noted that it allows time to determine the need and that they can grow into and make excellent use of whatever it is they have most efficiently. She noted that they can recognize when it is truly time to go forward with a garage and by that time, it is very possible that they will have a good amount of money that they can put toward that. Mr. Hatfield noted that the parking study that was done a few years ago concluded that there was adequate parking and where it missed the mark. He noted that the areas where there was a lot of vacant parking available were the less desirable locations and not driving much demand. The other thing that the study neglected to point out was while there was excess parking space, it was less than 200 parking spaces, so one big employer coming to town and that excess capacity would be gone quickly. Mr. Hatfield noted that the solution that they have worked with the Partnership to try and develop is trying to do the best of both worlds, manage the current assets that they have to the best of their capacity and start generating some revenue that can then be put towards a future structure at some point down the path. Mr. Lindell asked Mr. Hatfield if he had experience in the other municipalities that they do business with where they have had a situation where they have taken over and made the decisions and some of those decisions have not worked out. Responding to Mr. Lindell, Mr.Hatfield stated what they have proposed and have been working with the Partnership is really a collaboration approach. Mr. Hatfield stated what they

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING OF JUNE 9, 2020 PAGE 9 have suggested is not that type of model, rather that they come in as a manager, a partner with the City and the Partnership to develop this program. He noted if implemented, they will be putting some cash in, in the form of purchasing the equipment that is needed to get the system going and based on their number, they will be able to get repaid for that within five years and after a fee for Colonial Parking, the net revenue is really accruing to the benefit of the Partnership, not the Colonial Parking. He noted that because they are there as a manager and those funds really are to the benefit of the Partnership, it is really the Partnership and the City that will be driving how the program works and what it does. Responding to Mr. Contant, Mrs. Donna Mitchell, City Manager stated the parking permit money goes to the Downtown Dover Partnership (DDP). Ms. Laird noted that is part of the discussion in the solution, but currently that is the way it is set up. Mr. Hatfield noted that the parking fine revenue remains with the City. Mr. Hatfield noted that under this arrangement it would go to the benefit of the DDP as well, Colonial Parking would manage the process, but it would still be DDP funds. Responding to Mr. Neil, Mrs. Mitchell stated that is only in the DDP area where this is controlled, any traffic violations or parking violations outside of that area would come directly to the City. Mr. Hatfield noted that they are contemplating it, would be within the footprint of the downtown as outlined in the exhibit of the MOU. He noted they would only be doing enforcement on parking regulation, not traffic violations or moving enforcement. Mr. Neil moved to recommend approving continuation of the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) discussion and be brought back to Council. The motion was seconded by Mr. Sudler and unanimously approved. FY 2020 Coronavirus Emergency Supplemental Funding Program (CESF) – Joint Grant Submittal with Kent County Mr. Matthew Harline, Assistant City Manager, reviewed the background and analysis regarding the FY 2020 Coronavirus Emergency Supplemental Funding Program (CESF) – Joint Grant Submittal with Kent County. Staff recommended approval of the grant project as requested. Responding to Mr. Anderson, Mr. Harline stated that there are other grants being sought but this does not cover all the costs for the police department. He noted that this grant does allow for them to recover the salary that was the emergency pay for those first couple of weeks and so far as they can identify it, no other grant would. Mr. Harline stated that it is possible this does not all have to go towards law enforcement, even though it is a Department of Justice assistance grant, but they believe that the emergency pay during that first two weeks is just what they paid the police department this money. He stated some of the supplies and other overtime expenses that are eligible for some of the other grants are going to be applied for. Responding to Mr. Taylor, Mr. Harline stated that there are not any identified circumstances that this grant would turn into a loan. He noted that it is a reimbursement grant. These expenses have already been incurred by the City. Mr. Harline verified that it is all going to go to the police department. Mr. Neil moved to recommend approval of the grant project as requested, as recommended by Staff. The motion was seconded by Mr. Taylor and unanimously carried.

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING OF JUNE 9, 2020 PAGE 10 City Manager Search Council President Hare stated, regarding the City Manager Search, that Council needed to decide how they want to do it. He stated he thought a headhunter would be the easiest way to do it since they are up against the time frame. Mr. Slavin stated they want to promote a diverse pool of candidates in this and they want to make sure that they make every effort to attract as diverse a pool of candidates. He noted they also want complete transparency in this and noted that it would put in-house staff in an awkward position for them to run the search for a city manager whom they might then report to. He stated this is a moment where they can keep an arm's length distance from the proceedings as far as how it is advertised and how the candidates are ranked and scored prior to coming to them. Mr. Slavin stated then on the interview committee, they can make the decision on who is involved in the interview and what the questions are. He noted that he envisioned this being a long process and could see two and three rounds of interviews, including multiple panels within some of those rounds, because they want to get a broad response from the workforce as well as their constituents. Mr. Sudler stated he shared the same sentiment and supports what Mr. Slavin has brought forth and hope that they can achieve that. Mr. Sudler also stated he agreed with Mr. Hare that they should have a headhunter to conduct at least the first phase of receiving some costly candidate selection. Mr. Anderson stated he concurred with what the other three councilmen have said and noted that he liked an in-house process, but in his view, they are five months behind on that. Mr. Neil stated he concurred that they should have a headhunter, but even that process makes it a long process because not everybody that is brought to their attention is really a good candidate. He stated the sooner, the better, and while they still have an outstanding city manager here to kind of guide them a little bit or to guide whatever the process is. Responding to Mr. Contant, Mrs. Donna Mitchell, City Manager, stated that in the document that was provided for the general description, the text that is in red, were amendments from the previous job description. Mr. Contant stated he thought the job description looks good and completely agrees with moving forward with a headhunter to get this process rolling. He noted that for the sake of transparency using a third party is probably the best route to go, especially in light of historic events with the City of Dover. Mr. Contant moved to recommend acceptance of the use of a headhunter, seconded by Mr. Taylor. Mr. Sudler asked if within the job description, did they specify the type of culture that the municipality is looking to reflect in the workforce, which will pretty much pinpoint the kind of leadership style and the behavior in what they are looking for. Mr. Lindell noted that they need to be very transparent and that there needs to be some community involvement and it needs to be diverse as well. Mr. Lindell stated if they are agreeing on going for a so-called headhunter, a lot of these other issues will get flushed out once they get that person on board. Mr. Anderson stated he was not comfortable with approving the job description right now, and liked Mr. Lindell’s proposal. Mr. Anderson stated enforcing municipal ordinances has never been a city manager thing. He noted that the city manager has no one to enforce ordinances because the police are under the Mayor and code enforcement is under the Director of Planning and Code Enforcement. Mr. Anderson stated that

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING OF JUNE 9, 2020 PAGE 11 particular provision was not there before, and it probably should not be there now, because there is no mechanism for a city manager to do that. Responding to Mr. Anderson, Mr. Hare stated that there are other ordinances other than planning and the police department. He noted that when they decide on a firm to bring in to talk to, they will give Council some guidance too. Mr. Hare stated they will tell them what are looking for, they are experienced in all this, and probably might even know a little bit more about it than they do. Mr. Anderson stated that he liked the rest of the amendment, that was the only one he had a concern with, because of the unique design of the city manager's office. Mrs. Kim Hawkins, Human Resources Director, stated if Council is going to be using an executive recruiting firm, when she did call them to get a generalized price for their services, they shared that they would need to understand what their needs were. She noted to just make sure they understand what they want the recruiting firm to do for them. Mr. Sudler asked if there would be a component of the job description or analysis that allows for City Council to give an in-depth example, or state what they are looking for, being that the city manager serves at the pleasure of City Council. He noted that he knew that there are city manager daily duties and administrative duties, but part of that individual's duties is also to report to City Council. He noted that they need to have a clearer description of what that looks like. Responding to Mr. Sudler, Mr. Hare stated that he understood what Mr. Sudler was saying, but the city manager might report to Council, but Council does not run the City. He noted that is why they hire a city manager. Mr. Neil stated he agreed with Mr. Hare. Mr. Lindell suggested they should act on getting an RFP sent out to enlist a consultant/head hunter, to help them with the recruiting. He noted that in the meantime, they can start finessing the job description. Then once they get someone on board, a lot of these other issues they can address in the whole process and have some guidance and go in the right direction. Mr. Contant agreed with Mr. Lindell and stated that at this point their action items should be that they recommend that Human Resources (HR) move forward with preparing a request for proposals (RFP) and bring them back. He noted that it looked like HR already has contacts with a few different firms and allow them to make the decision on which firm they think would best fulfill the need, at the same time, Council can develop the job description further that the firm will base their work off of. Mr. Sudler, referring back to the performance evaluation instrument that they use every year to evaluate the city manager, he stated a lot of times he is very uncomfortable trying to fill that out fully with the questions it asks. He noted in his view, they do not have any real written expectations, other than at the end of the year or the quarter or when they evaluate, to say whether or not they are doing these things. Mr. Sudler stated that it needs to be clear what City Council's expectations are to be incorporated into that instrument. He noted that he believes they need to have a stronger role and that maybe they need to have a workshop on what that looks like and what that entails. Mr. Cole asked if an RFP will take away time. He noted that they want somebody up and running and did not want to cut anybody short. He noted that they want all the best candidates, but at the same time they are getting short on time. Mrs. Hawkins stated that she is not an RFP expert. She noted that she has already called a couple of firms and they have indicated that their costs would probably be under $25,000. She stated she was not sure if she needed to issue an RFP or would be able to call several firms, get quotes from them

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING OF JUNE 9, 2020 PAGE 12 and present that to Council. Mrs. Hawkins noted that if Council asked her to do an RFP, she gave an estimate of at least six to eight weeks. Mr. Lindell asked if it is under $25,000, what would they get as far as service is concerned. He stated that he thought they would need something for what is it going to cost them if they want to do this, or if they want the full service, as far as from start to finish, with them taking an active role in the process. Mrs. Hawkins stated with an RFP they would need to spell out exactly what services they want. Mr. Neil stated that what they were looking for tonight would be to agree on choosing a consultant/head hunter or in-house and then if they will pay travel expenses, then the selection of the interview committee and the scoring rubric. He stated that the review of the job or even the process, can wait, because it is not going to happen right away. He stated that he would put a limit on it when the RFP goes out and how long they take which should not take more than two weeks to come back with some sort of an offer. Mr. Hare he agreed with Mr. Neil, but also with Ms. Hawkins. He stated he had confidence in Mrs. Hawkins. Mr. Hare stated that he thought she could reach out to however many firms she knows that are out there, and just make that phone call and ask what they are going to charge and give them what Council is looking for and request a reply within 48 hours and most of them will do that. He noted that way, it will cut it down to less than two weeks. He stated to let Ms. Hawkins do her job, and come back to Council with the companies she contacted and her recommendation. He noted that she will be able to explain it to them and that this is not the hiring process. Responding to Mrs. Hawkins, Mr. Hare stated Council is asking to find an executive firm to basically post the positions, find the candidates and do a first screening of the candidates and then perhaps recommend whatever the committee is seeking, and then the committee takes it from there. Mrs. Hawkins stated that they have done some interviews through this route before, and when it comes to the travel expense, any executive firm will tell Council that they must be paying for their travel. It is just industry standard to pay for travel. Responding to Mr. Taylor, Mr. Hare stated that Mrs. Hawkins is initially bringing information for the firms back to Council as a whole so they can see which firm they want to use. Mr. Hare stated that they can go over the what criteria they are using for the selection committee. Mr. Hare moved to recommend that they request Mrs. Kim Hawkins, Director of Human Resources to proceed with contacting the head hunters and search firms to get the information to bring back to City Council. The motion was seconded by Mr. Anderson and unanimously carried. Review of the COVID19 Operating Procedures Mrs. Donna Mitchell, City Manager, reviewed a document titled COVID-19/Coronavirus Procedure Manual - Beginning March 2020 (Attachment #1). Mr. Neil complimented Mrs. Mitchell and the entire Staff for what they have done. Mrs. Mitchell also thanked Staff. She noted that it has been very stressful for Staff and that they are holding up pretty good.

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING OF JUNE 9, 2020 PAGE 13 Mr. Neil moved for adjournment of the Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee meeting, seconded by Mr. Content and unanimously carried. Meeting adjourned at 8:47 p.m. Mr. Taylor moved for adjournment of the Council Committee of the Whole meeting. The motion was seconded by Mr. Slavin and unanimously carried. Meeting adjourned at 8:48 p.m. William F. Hare Council President WFH/jt S:\AGENDAS-MINUTES-PACKETS-PRESENTATIONS-ATT&EXH\Committee-Minutes\2020\06-09-2020 CCW Minutes.wpd Attachments Attachment #1 - Document titled COVID-19/Coronavirus Procedure Manual - Beginning March 2020

ATTACHMENT #1 Council Committee of the Whole Meeting of June 9, 2020 COVID – 19/Coronavirus Procedure Manual Beginning March 2020 Prepared by Kim Hawkins, Human Resources Director

Guidance the Center for Disease Control and the State of Delaware shall supersede this procedure. This procedure is subject to change. TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE Human Resources Related Matters Families First Coronavirus Response Act (FFCRA) 2 Work Schedules 2 Health and Safety – Organizational Health and Safety Precautions– Organizational Wide 3 Temperature Checks 3 Employee Interaction with Customers 4 Opening of Facilities 4 Building Occupancy Levels 4 Sneeze Guards 5 Fleet Maintenance Procedure 5 Appendix A: Employee Rights: Paid Sick Leave and Expanded Family and 6 Medical Leave Under the Families First Coronavirus Response Act Appendix B Temperature Check-In Template and Questionnaire 7 Appendix C Job Aid for Employees and Customers Interaction during 9 COVID-19 Pandemic Appendix D Washing Your Hand 10 Appendix E Do the Five 11 Appendix F Essential Services Screening Recommendations for COVID- 12 19 Pandemic Appendix G Wearing Masks 14 Appendix H Masts must be worn 15 Appendix I Occupancy Level 16 1

Human Resources Related Matters Families First Coronavirus Response Act (FFCRA) The Families First Coronavirus Response Act (FFCRA) provides paid leave to employees for absences related COVID-19. The FFCRA became effect April 1, 2020 and expires on December 31, 2020. Supervisors are to contact the Human Resources Director to discuss any situation associated with COVID-19 as it relates to employees. Employees experiencing a need of absence from the work environment for matters related to COVID-19, including childcare, are to contact the Human Resources Department at 736-7073. A Representative of the Human Resources will discuss with the employee the need for the leave. Based on FFCRA, Human Resources will determine if the employee qualifies for paid leave and if so, the rate of compensation. Human Resources will manage all leaves and the associated paperwork and enter all leave into the payroll system. Human Resources will ensure Finance/Payroll has access to the necessary support via a shared file. Vacation and sick leave benefits will continue to be handled as in the past. Employees on previously approved leave will continue to be on such leave. Appendix A: Employee Rights: Paid Sick Leave and Expanded Family and Medical Leave Under the Families First Coronavirus Response Act Work Schedules Effective May 26, 2020, all staff returned to the work environment. Rotating work schedules, modified work schedules, and working from home were discontinued. FFCRA continues to be available to employees through December 31, 2020. Employees are to contact the Human Resources Department at 736-7073. A Representative of the Human Resources will discuss with the employee the need for the leave. Based on FFCRA, Human Resources will determine if the employee qualifies for paid leave and if so, the rate of compensation. 2

Health and Safety – Organizational Health and Safety Precautions– Organizational Wide • Social Distancing: Staff will maintain six feet (6’) social distancing whenever practical. • Masks: As per the Continuity of Government Plan – COVID19 – Update #4, City staff is required to wear face coverings (masks). For clarification purposes it is expected that staff will utilize masks when entering City facilities, when in common areas in City facilities, when sharing vehicles and within six feet (6’) of anyone regardless of the environment. Utilization of masks is mandatory. Please let your Supervisor know if you need a mask or replacement PPE. • Additional PPE: Additional PPE is provided to field staff such as gloves and Tyvek suits. • Cleaning Work Areas: Office staff is responsible for cleaning their own work areas and should not permit others to use their telephones. Field staff are responsible for cleaning vehicles and radios. The custodial contractor continues to provide services to common areas. If employees are not complying with the protective guidance please give them a polite verbal reminder. It will take some time for everyone to get used to wearing masks, using hand sanitizer, and other safety measures. If employees do not heed the polite verbal reminder, disciplinary action can be taken. Other employee’s health and safety must be of the highest importance to all of us. An employee’s lack of concern for their fellow co-worker and lack of adherence to the safety measures will not be tolerated. Temperature Checks Temperature checks will occur at City facilities each morning. All staff will have their temperature checked before starting work. Department Heads have the responsibility to ensure that all employees under their supervision have their temperatures taken each day they report to the work environment. The guidelines for temperature checks has been evaluated and changed to reflect the increase of personnel present in the city buildings in order to help identify any potential COVID cases and prevent any unnecessary exposure. The temperature threshold is currently 99.5. If the employee’s temperature is above 99.5 the individual must be sent home. The employee cannot go to their office, or visit anyone, they have to leave the facility. Please be sure to ask the questions indicated on Appendix B: Temperature Check-In Template and Questionnaire of staff. This will assist in evaluating staff for potential infection. Documenting the employee’s response to each question is not required. If the employee answers yes to any of the questions, they are to be sent home and advised they should contact their primary care physician or call the COVID-19 hotline at 1-866-408-1899. 3

It is the responsibility of the individual checking temperatures to email or call Kim Hawkins, Human Resources Director, of anyone who was sent home due to having a fever of 99.6 or greater or responded yes to any of the health-related questions. Contact must be at the conclusion of the temperature taking time frame. The Director can be contacted at khawkins@dover.de.us or 302- 505-4101. Information obtained during the temperature taking process should remain confidential and shared on an only-need to know basis. At the conclusion of each week, the temperature Check-In logs are to be forwarded to Kay Sass, Emergency Management Coordinator/Public Information Officer. Her email address is ksass@dover.de.us. Employee Interaction with Customers The City of Dover employees remains one of our top priorities. To ensure their safety and health, all employees who have any interaction with customers are to reference Appendix C: Job Aid for Employees and Customers Interaction during COVID-19 Pandemic. The appendix provides guidelines on ways to interact with customers and maintain social distancing guidelines and protect their health. Select vehicles have a placard that requests anyone approaching the vehicle to maintain a six (6) foot distance from the employee. Opening of Facilities To protect the safety of our employees and the customers we serve, many safety measures have been implemented. We will continue to keep facilities closed (but not all services) to the public while staff completes daily work assignments. Building Occupancy Levels With each new Phase that the State of Delaware enters, the occupancy level for each building will be evaluated. Signage will be clearly displayed at the entrance of each public building. The appropriate Department Head will ensure compliance with the occupancy level for their area of responsibility. 4

Sneeze Guards Sneeze guards have been installed in appropriate areas. Fleet Maintenance Procedure The following measures are to be taken when seeking vehicle maintenance, repairs, fluids, parts, etc. - All Customers (City staff) are to schedule maintenance or repairs via phone (736-7068 Monday -Friday) or email (bennis@dover.de.us Monday - Friday). The email method is preferred. - Vehicles are to be dropped off in the Fleet parking area at the designated appointment time and the keys are to be left in the drop box. - All vehicles being dropped off are to be sanitized by the driver to include the steering wheel, shifter, and door handles when exiting the vehicle and dropping it off for service. Fleet staff will be doing the same before returning the vehicle to the customer. - Customers picking up vehicles after service are to schedule a pick-up time and coordinate a feasible pick up location for their keys. - It has become common practice for divisions to obtain oils, nuts and bolts, bulbs, and various products to support quick fixes done by drivers. During this time, there will not be access for such outside of making appointments. - Under no circumstances is any customer to enter the Fleet shop. If anyone other than Fleet staff and parts delivery drivers wearing the appropriate PPE enters the shop, they will be asked to leave immediately. 5

APPENDIX A EMPLOYEE RIGHTS PAID SICK LEAVE AND EXPANDED FAMILY AND MEDICAL LEAVE UNDER THE FAMILIES FIRST CORONAVIRUS RESPONSE ACT The Families First Coronavirus Response Act (FFCRA or Act) requires certain employers to provide their employees with paid sick leave and expanded family and medical leave for specified reasons related to COVID-19. These provisions will apply from April 1, 2020 through December 31, 2020. ► PAID LEAVE ENTITLEMENTS Generally, employers covered under the Act must provide employees: Up to two weeks (80 hours, or a part-time employee’s two-week equivalent) of paid sick leave based on the higher of their regular rate of pay, or the applicable state or Federal minimum wage, paid at: • 100% for qualifying reasons #1-3 below, up to $511 daily and $5,110 total; • 2/3 for qualifying reasons #4 and 6 below, up to $200 daily and $2,000 total; and • Up to 12 weeks of paid sick leave and expanded family and medical leave paid at 2/3 for qualifying reason #5 below for up to $200 daily and $12,000 total. A part-time employee is eligible for leave for the number of hours that the employee is normally scheduled to work over that period. ► ELIGIBLE EMPLOYEES In general, employees of private sector employers with fewer than 500 employees, and certain public sector employers, are eligible for up to two weeks of fully or partially paid sick leave for COVID-19 related reasons (see below). Employees who have been employed for at least 30 days prior to their leave request may be eligible for up to an additional 10 weeks of partially paid expanded family and medical leave for reason #5 below. ► QUALIFYING REASONS FOR LEAVE RELATED TO COVID-19 An employee is entitled to take leave related to COVID-19 if the employee is unable to work, including unable to telework, because the employee: 1. is subject to a Federal, State, or local quarantine or 5. is caring for his or her child whose school or isolation order related to COVID-19; place of care is closed (or child care provider is 2. has been advised by a health care provider to unavailable) due to COVID-19 related reasons; or self-quarantine related to COVID-19; 6. is experiencing any other substantially-similar 3. is experiencing COVID-19 symptoms and is seeking condition specified by the U.S. Department of a medical diagnosis; Health and Human Services. 4. is caring for an individual subject to an order described in (1) or self-quarantine as described in (2); ► ENFORCEMENT The U.S. Department of Labor’s Wage and Hour Division (WHD) has the authority to investigate and enforce compliance with the FFCRA. Employers may not discharge, discipline, or otherwise discriminate against any employee who lawfully takes paid sick leave or expanded family and medical leave under the FFCRA, files a complaint, or institutes a proceeding under or related to this Act. Employers in violation of the provisions of the FFCRA will be subject to penalties and enforcement by WHD. For additional information or to file a complaint: WAGE AND HOUR DIVISION 1-866-487-9243 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR TTY: 1-877-889-5627 dol.gov/agencies/whd 6 WH1422 REV 03/20

APPENDIX B Temperature Checks Upon entering the building, have a general location where everyone must check in while maintaining social distancing - preferably choose an area with a sink, soap and paper towels so they can wash upon entry into your facility. Everyone must maintain social distancing and masks must be worn when in common areas of city buildings. (e.g: Hallways) If the temperature is above 99.5 degrees Fahrenheit they must go home. (We have lowered the number to reflect the DE Dept of Public Health recommended guideline, particularly since all staff is back as an added precaution). Ask the individual… How are you feeling today? Do you have symptoms of respiratory infection (fever or shaking chills, cough, shortness of breath, severe sore throat, loss of taste or smell, or muscle aches)? Have you been in close contact (e.g., within 6 feet for more than 10 minutes) with a person with confirmed COVID-19 infection? If they answer yes, send them home and suggest they get in contact with their primary care physician or they can call the hotline at 1-866-408-1899. If no fever, remind them to wash their hands frequently while in the building and use hand sanitizer when that is not available. Reminder to all, do not shake hands or touch others while in the building, avoid common areas, maintain social distancing and wear a mask when in hallways or within 6 feet of anyone. 7

Date Time First name Last name Symptoms (Y or N) Temp Custodians 8

APPENDIX C If an employee needs to enter an occupied customer premises the following questions should be used when interacting with the customer: Customer Questions: If you suspect a customer is sick and you have concerns entering their home, the following language has been vetted and approved but our Legal team: • Is there any reason I should not enter your premises? Especially reasons related to the current Coronavirus? Does anyone on premises have a fever, cough, sore throat, chills, shortness of breath, headache or other flu like symptoms? • Does anyone on premises have reason to believe they have been exposed to the virus or been asked by their health department, physician’s office or ER to self-quarantine? • For your safety and mine, I’m going to maintain six-foot social distancing. I will stay six feet away from you and ask that all individuals on premises do the same with me. I interact with customers a lot. How can I keep myself safe in case a customer is sick? • Practice Social Distancing: When coming into contact with a customer, attempt to keep a distance of approximately six feet from the nearest person while working and avoid congregating in any common areas. • Keep Surfaces Clean: Keep your workstation/truck/on-the-job materials clean and do your part to support increased cleanliness in shared spaces with your co-workers. • When entering and leaving a customer’s home, be sure to wipe down all surfaces prior and post work being performed. o This will also support Exelon’s brand reputation and reinforce our commitment to best practices. • Thumbs-Up!: Avoid handshakes, hugs, high-fives and any other engagements that have you making direct contact with a customer. Handshaking, as a customary greeting can promote virus transmission – so it is best to avoid. • Avoid Using or Sharing Public Pens: Public pens can be found at a customer counter, in a building lobby and many other places. Use your own pen and carry others for customer use. • Have Protection Equipment Available: Keep hand sanitizer in your possession and use it regularly in-between washing your hands. Make sure you also keep disinfectant wipes with you to clean surfaces/equipment. • If you are uncomfortable in any situation, contact you direct supervisor for guidance and support on how to deal with the situation at hand. Note: This can be used an employee handout. 9

APPENDIX D 10

APPENDIX E 11

APPENDIX F Essential Services Screening Recommendations for COVID-19 Pandemic To help protect the public against the spread of COVID-19, Governor John Carney and Delaware Division of Public Health Director Karyl T. Rattay, MD, MS, are requiring that high-risk businesses, and strongly recommend that all other employers, screen employees each day before work by following these steps: • All employees who are able to work from home should be working from home at this time. • For those employees who must report to work: each employee must be asked about and report body temperature at or above 99.5 degrees Fahrenheit. If facility has the capability to perform active temperature monitoring, they may do so. If an employee reports or is noted to have body temperature at or above 99.5 degrees Fahrenheit, that employee should be sent home or undergo secondary screening by facility medical personnel, if available at facility. o It is best to use touchless thermometers (forehead/temporal artery thermometers) if possible, but if you must use oral or other types of thermometers, make sure to clean the thermometers thoroughly between each employee, as to not spread infection. o Follow the manufacturer’s directions to disinfect the thermometer. o If no directions are available, rinse the tip of the thermometer in cold water, clean it with alcohol or alcohol swabs, and then rinse it again. o If you do not have thermometers on site, have your employees take their temperatures at home. They should stay home if they have an elevated temperature at or above 99.5 degrees Fahrenheit and follow the same protocol. o Personnel screening employees for fever should consider wearing gloves and face masks per CDC recommendations. • Employers must screen each incoming employee with a basic questionnaire, which should include at least the below, however can be made more comprehensive and/or employer-specific in consultation with medical professionals: o Do you have symptoms of respiratory infection (fever or shaking chills, cough, shortness of breath, severe sore throat, loss of taste or smell, or muscle aches)? ▪ If YES, but symptoms have a known cause (asthma, COPD, chronic sinusitis, etc.), employer or medical personnel should weigh risks for COVID-19 exposure and consider sending employee home. • The employee should remain at home for a total of seven (7) days after symptoms have resolved defined as the resolution of fever without the use of fever-reducing medications and improvement in respiratory symptoms (e.g., cough, shortness of breath); and at least 10 days have passed since symptoms first appeared before being permitted to return back to work. • Three days after symptoms resolve, patients are no longer required to self- isolate at home; however, they must continue to practice strict social 12

distancing, avoid sustained close contact with others and maintain good hand hygiene, for the remaining four days (for a total of seven days) before returning to work and their normal daily routine. • Critical infrastructure/essential services workers may be allowed to return to work three (3) days following fever resolution and improvement in respiratory symptoms while wearing a mask after options to improve staffing have been exhausted [facilities have self-identified as operating under crisis staffing patterns] and in consultation with their occupational health program (if available). These employees should still report temperature and absence of symptoms each day prior to starting work. Facilities should have exposed employees wear an appropriate face covering (i.e. medical facemask for direct patient care workers or cloth face covering for all others) while at work for a total of 14 days following fever resolution and improvement in respiratory symptoms. ▪ Employees should consult medical professionals if desired or needed and may adhere to screening decisions made by on-site medical personnel as appropriate. ▪ Alternate symptoms including headache, nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea, and others have been identified as potential COVID-19 symptoms and may prompt further screening, action, or investigation. ▪ If at any time a doctor confirms the cause of the employee’s fever or other symptoms is not COVID-19 and approves them to return to work, then the employee can return. ▪ If NO, proceed to next step o Have you been in close contact (e.g., within 6 feet for more than 10 minutes) with a person with confirmed COVID-19 infection? (note: this does not apply to healthcare workers using appropriate PPE—see DPH guidance DHAN #429 for Management of Potential Exposure for Healthcare Personnel) ▪ If YES, employee will be required to stay at home for 14 days from the time they were exposed to confirmed COVID-19. ▪ Facilities could consider allowing asymptomatic employees who have had an exposure to a person infected with COVID-19 to continue to work after options to improve staffing have been exhausted and in consultation with their occupational health program (if available). These employees should still report temperature and absence of symptoms each day prior to starting work. Facilities should have exposed employees wear a facemask while at work for the 14 days after the exposure event if there is a sufficient supply of facemasks. If the employee develops even mild symptoms consistent with COVID-19, they must cease patient care activities, don a facemask (if not already wearing), and notify their supervisor or occupational health services prior to leaving work. Remember to continue to follow preventative measures no matter how many employees are in the office — physical distancing, stay home when sick, use cough and sneeze etiquette, and practice hand hygiene as often as possible. Clean all high-touch surfaces regularly. For more information, visit: coronavirus.delaware.gov/. For answers to your COVID-19 questions, call 1-866-408-1899. Those with a hearing impairment can dial 7- 1-1. Public inquiries and questions can be sent by email to DPHCall@delaware.gov. 13

APPENDIX G 14

APPENDIX H MASKS MUST BE WORN INSIDE THIS BUILDING Thank you for your cooperaƟon! 15

APPENDIX I Due to restricƟons on occupancy, only six (6) customers are allowed in at any Ɵme. Bills can be paid online, in the drive thru, the drop box, via phone or sign up for automated draŌ! Thank you! 16