Anexo

REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA JANUARY 14, 2013 - 7:30 P.M. CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 15 LOOCKERMAN PLAZA DOVER , DELAWARE OPEN FORUM - 15 MINUTES PRIOR TO OFFICIAL MEETING (7:15 P.M.) The “Open Forum” segment is provided to extend the opportunity to the general public to share their questions, thoughts, comments, concerns, and complaints. Discussion of any item appearing on the agenda as a public hearing is prohibited during the Open Forum as an opportunity will be provided during consideration of that item. Citizen comments are limited to three (3) minutes. Council is prohibited from taking action since they are not in official session; however, they may schedule such items as regular agenda items and act upon them in the future. INVOCATION BY MARY SMITH PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE LED BY MAYOR CAREY AGENDA ADDITIONS/DELETIONS * CONSENT AGENDA Those items on the Council Agenda which are considered routine and non-controversial shall be marked with an asterisk (*) and will be acted upon by a single roll call vote of the Council. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a member of Council so requests, in which event the matter shall be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered a separate item. * 1. Adoption of Minutes - Regular Council Meeting of December 10, 2012 2. Certificate of Appreciation - Tonda Parks 3. Presentation - 2012 Mayor's Prayer Breakfast Contributions A. United Service Organizations (USO) of Delaware - Joan Cote B. United Service Organizations (USO) Families of the Fallen - Wendy Fish C. Friends of Family Support - Timothy Dance D. Capital City Rotary Club for Military Appreciation Day - Gregg Moore

Council Agenda - January 14, 2013 Page 2 4. Parks, Recreation, and Community Enhancement Committee Report - December 10, 2012 A. Presentation - Economic Development Programs and Opportunities Available for the City of Dover by Dr. Michael Casson, Director, University Center for Economic Development and International Trade; Associate Professor of Economics; Dean, School of Graduate Studies and Research, Delaware State University (Committee Action Not Required) * B. Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Action Plan Amendment (Committee Recommended Acceptance of Staff's Recommendation to Reallocate $20,000 in FY 2011 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Funds from American Disabilities Act (ADA) Improvements in Council Chambers to the FY 2012 Homeownership Assistance Program) * C. Updates (Committee Action Not Required) * 5. Utility Committee Report - December 10, 2012 A. Capital School District Impact Fee Transfer (Committee Recommended Acceptance of Staff's Recommendation to Transfer 13 Equivalent Dwelling Unit (EDU) Credits from 211 Delaware Avenue, 945 Forest Street, and 75 Carver Road to the Capital School District Administration and Professional Development Center Campus Located at 194/198 Commerce Way (Tax Parcel #ED05-076.14-01-07.03) B. Quarterly Review of Utility Related Capital Investment Plan (CIP) (Electric and Water/Wastewater) (Committee Action Not Required) C. TEA/NAES Report (August and September) (Committee Action Not Required) D. Updates (Committee Action Not Required) 6. Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee Report - December 10, 2012 A. Reduced Rates for All-Electric Homes in December, January, and February (Committee Made No Recommendation) * B. Review of City of Dover Identity Theft Prevention Policy (Committee Recommended Acceptance of the Report and That the Identity Theft Prevention Policy Be Amended to Change the Frequency of Meetings to "As Necessary, If Any Significant Issues of Identity Theft Arise”) 7. Parks, Recreation, and Community Enhancement Committee Report - January 14, 2013 (Except for the following time sensitive issue, the PR&CE Committee Report from January 14, 2013 will be presented to Council during their Regular Meeting of January 28, 2013 for review and consideration) A. Consideration of The Green as a National Monument

Council Agenda - January 14, 2013 Page 3 * 8. Monthly Reports - November 2012 A. Budget B. City Assessor C. City Manager D. City Planner E. Dover Fire Department F. Economic Development Office 9. Annual Report of the Downtown Dover Partnership 10. Office of Highway Safety (OHS) Funds Approved for In-Car Cameras * 11. Appointment Recommended by Mayor Carey - Downtown Dover Partnership Board of Directors - Wallace R. Dixon (To Fill the Unexpired Term of Sophia R. Russell - Term to Expire May 2013) * 12. Appointment of Delaware Municipal Electric Corporation (DEMEC) Director and Alternate Director (Scott D. Koenig and Donna S. Mitchell) 13. Council Members Announcements /tm S:\AGENDAS-MINUTES-PACKETS\Council-Agendas\2013\01-14-2013.wpd THE AGENDA ITEMS AS LISTED MAY NOT BE CONSIDERED IN SEQUENCE. THIS AGENDA IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE TO INCLUDE THE ADDITION OR THE DELETION OF ITEMS, INCLUDING EXECUTIVE SESSIONS.

REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING The Regular Council Meeting was held on December 10, 2012 at 7:30 p.m. with Council President Leary presiding. Council members present were Mr. Anderson, Mr. Lynn, Mr. Perza, Mr. Bonar, Mr. Hare, and Mr. Hutchison. Mrs. Williams was absent. Council staff members present were Police Chief Hosfelt, Mrs. Mitchell, Mr. Koenig, Mrs. Townshend, City Solicitor Rodriguez, and Mrs. McDowell. Mayor Carey 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 Leary 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 Councilman Perza, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. AGENDA ADDITIONS/DELETIONS Mr. Bonar moved for approval of the agenda as presented, seconded by Mr. Hutchison and unanimously carried. Mr. Bonar moved for approval of the consent agenda as presented, seconded by Mr. Hutchison and carried by a unanimous roll call vote. ADOPTION OF MINUTES - REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 26, 2012 The Minutes of the Regular Council Meeting of November 26, 2012 were unanimously approved by motion of Mr. Bonar, seconded by Mr. Hutchison and bore the written approval of Mayor Carey. ELECTION RESULTS - 2012 SPECIAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION Mrs. Traci McDowell, City Clerk, reported the results of the 2012 Special Municipal Election held on November 27, 2012, as certified by the Election Board, are as follows: FOURTH DISTRICT COUNCIL Wallace R. Dixon 85 Bernhard A. Greenfield 23 Total District Votes Cast 108 Total Registered Voters 4,028 Mr. Bonar moved for approval of the Election Results as reported by the City Clerk. The motion was seconded by Mr. Hare and unanimously carried.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 10, 2012 PAGE 2 OATH OF OFFICE - COUNCIL - FOURTH DISTRICT - WALLACE R. DIXON The Honorable Henry DuPont Ridgely, Justice of the Delaware Supreme Court, administered the Oath of Office as follows: Council - Fourth District (Term to expire May 2015) - Wallace R. Dixon RECESS FOR PHOTOGRAPHS (MAYOR AND COUNCIL) Mr. Bonar moved to recess to take photographs of the Mayor and members of City Council, seconded by Mr. Lynn and unanimously carried. Meeting recessed at 7:36 p.m. Noting the absence of Councilwoman Williams, by unanimous consent, Council deferred taking photographs of the Mayor and Council. By unanimous consent, the meeting was reconvened. Meeting reconvened at 7:39 p.m. with Council President Leary presiding. Council members present were Mr. Anderson, Mr. Dixon, Mr. Lynn, Mr. Perza, Mr. Bonar, Mr. Hare, and Mr. Hutchison. Mrs. Williams was absent. CERTIFICATE OF APPRECIATION - CITY ELECTRIC WORKERS WHO ASSISTED IN NEW JERSEY HURRICANE RECOVERY The following Certificate of Appreciation was read into the record by the City Clerk: WHEREAS, the City of Dover is fortunate to have Electric Department Line Crew members who work diligently to maintain electricity through adverse circumstances and weather conditions; and WHEREAS, on November 3, 2012, the City of Dover was requested to aid in power restoration to the communities of Madison and Harding Township, New Jersey, due to widespread power outages resulting from the effects of Hurricane Sandy; and WHEREAS, on November 4, 2012, five members of the City's Line Crew were dispatched to New Jersey and three additional members joined them on November 8, 2012; and WHEREAS, these individuals demonstrated their dedication by going above and beyond the necessary day-to-day actions by stepping forward to serve those in need outside of our community; and WHEREAS, we are extremely proud of their efforts and thankful for their willingness to share their skills during this time of great hardship for our neighbors to the north. NOW, THEREFORE, it is deemed an honor and privilege, on this 10th day of December 2012, to present this Certificate of Appreciation to the City of Dover Electric Line Crews for their efforts in restoring power to other communities. With Sincere Appreciation from the Mayor and Council

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 10, 2012 PAGE 3 PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER RENAMING COURT STREET, DUKE OF YORK STREET, AND WILLIAM PENN STREET AS MARTIN LUTHER KING STREET; RENAMING CAPITAL DRIVE AS COURT STREET (RETAINING THE COURT STREET ALLEY NAME); THE PLACEMENT OF PLAQUES OF DEDICATION TO WILLIAM PENN AND THE DUKE OF YORK; RENAMING THE DOVER PUBLIC LIBRARY IN HONOR OF DR. MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR. During their Regular Meeting of November 26, 2012, City Council approved the Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee’s recommendation to set a public hearing at this time and place to consider a proposal to rename Court, Duke of York, and William Penn Streets as Martin Luther King Street, to rename Capital Drive as Court Street, and for the alley currently named Court Street to remain Court Street, and to consider the placement of plaques of dedication to William Penn and the Duke of York on the respective streets and the proposed renaming of the Dover Public Library in honor of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Members were reminded that the initial proposal was to rename the entirety of the Division Street (Route 8) corridor, which crosses west to east through the City of Dover (City limit to City limit), as Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard. Staff noted that the proposal was being brought forward by City Council through the Legislative, Finance and Administration Committee and was not following the procedure specified in Dover Code of Ordinances, Chapter 98, Article II, Section 98-45 Street Name Change Procedure, which begins with a petition from property owners. Mrs. Ann Marie Townshend, Director of Planning and Community Development, reviewed the Staff Review Report and Development Advisory Committee Comments. The new street name proposed is Martin Luther King Jr. Street. As part of the renaming proposal, the internal drive aisle within the Courtside Apartment complex would be named Court Street. Also, the alley street segment on the south side of the current Court Street located between River Road and Cowgill Street would retain the name of Court Street. Members were provided a map of the proposed corridor. Mrs. Townshend advised members that the DAC has offered recommendations regarding the proposal, as follows: 1. Staff recommended that if the street name change is approved by City Council that an effective date of February 1, 2013 be set. This will give the affected agencies time to make the necessary operational changes and for notification of property owners. 2. Staff recommended the use of the street term “Boulevard” rather than “Street.” Resulting in a street name as Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard. 3. If the one way segments of Duke of York Street and William Penn Street are also selected for the street name change, then Staff recommended that the use of the post direction identifier of North and South should be utilized. Resulting in street names of Martin Luther King Jr. Street (Boulevard) North and Martin Luther King Jr. Street (Boulevard) South.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 10, 2012 PAGE 4 4. Staff recommended the use of the post direction identifier of North and South for the areas to remain named as Court Street: Court Street North for the internal drive aisle within the Garden Court Apartments and Court Street South for the street segment south of the existing Court Street where the single family houses exist. 5. As part of the Development Advisory Committee process, a series of City, County, and State agencies were notified of the street name change request. Any comments received regarding the request were attached to the report. 6. Upon approval of the street name change, notification of appropriate City, County, and State agencies will be completed by the City of Dover. 7. Upon approval of the street name change, a public outreach effort (in various media) is recommended to alert residents, customers, visitors, etc. of the change and its implementation. A key contact point should be established for questions. 8. Upon approval of the street name change, the installation of updated street name blades and other associated street signage will need to be completed by the City of Dover. 9. Upon approval of the street names and assignment of street numbers (if necessary), it is the responsibility of the individual property owner to bear the cost of and take action to repost address number and update appropriate mailing address on documents. 10. In this area of the City, there are a number of Information Map Kiosks located throughout the Legislative Mall area, at the Johnson Victrola Museum, and within public parking lots i.e. Bradford Street Lot that will need to be updated with the street name changes. These maps were funded and installed by various state agencies and non-profit groups. 11. The motion of November 13, 2012 by the Legislative, Finance and Administration Committee also included other recommendations for the placement of plaques of dedication for William Penn and Duke of York and a proposal for the renaming of the Dover Public Library in honor of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. This report does not provide a review of these proposals. a. Staff noted that the Delaware Public Archives manages the Delaware Historical Markers program where markers are placed at historically significant locations statewide.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 10, 2012 PAGE 5 Responding to Mr. Anderson, Mrs. Townshend confirmed that if Council approved the proposal as is and did not include properties located on South or North Court Street, there would be no residential properties affected by the proposed change. Council President Leary declared the public hearing open. Mr. Jim Stewart, 742 Bicentennial Boulevard, indicated his support for the street name changes. He noted that the media had mentioned the new Library in their report of this proposal and since the Library Capital Campaign remains underway, he requested that the naming of the Library not be included in this matter since it could affect fund raising efforts. Mr. Bruce Haas, 53 N. Halsey Road, explained his partial opposition to the street name changes, noting no objections to the renaming of that portion of Court Street from the bridge to Route 13. He stated his opposition was with the renaming of William Penn and Duke of York Streets. He reminded members that if it wasn't for the Duke of York, residents would be speaking Dutch and be answering to New York or Amsterdam, and if it wasn’t for William Penn, Delaware’s capital would be Harrisburg and that when William Penn was granted lands from Pennsylvania and later Delaware, he established laws. He felt that any change in these street names would be disrespectful to these individuals (the Duke of York and William Penn). Mrs. Ann Stewart, 742 Bicentennial Boulevard, stated that although she supported the renaming of the streets, she requested that the naming of the Library not be considered in conjunction with this proposal. Mr. Bernhard Greenfield, 901 Wilson Drive, noted that Martin Luther King, Jr. accomplished so much more for not only his people but for the entire country and he felt that he deserved to be given recognition. He suggested that rather than changing street names to honor Martin Luther King, Jr., that the City name the new Library as the Martin Luther King, Jr. Dover Public Library, which would cost substantially less than the remaining of streets. Mr. Robert Bresnahan, 14 Muirfield Court, advised members that as a member of the Friends of the Library, he supported the current name of the Dover Public Library. He expressed pride in the Dover community, City Council, and State legislators, particularly Senator Brian Bushweller, for the manner in which the proposal had been handled, which he felt had demonstrated the concept of a democratic society. He reviewed the process involved with the consideration of the proposal and felt that it had been a wonderful example of citizens and government leadership in this community sharing a desired goal and then finding a solution acceptable to all parties involved. He congratulated all who participated and have been involved in this democratic process. Mrs. Beverly Bresnahan, 14 Muirfield Court, stated that she was addressing members both as the Secretary to the Friends of the Library and as a resident. Although she did not support the renaming of the Dover Public Library, she did support the proposal to rename Court Street in honor of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. She reminded members that many individuals in the community had made donations to support the construction of the new Library. In addition, she stated that she was speaking on behalf of Barbara Qaissaunee, another Board Member of the Friends of the Library who

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 10, 2012 PAGE 6 was not able to attend the meeting, and that Ms. Qaissaunee's family held a fund raiser and family and friends contributed enough to have a room in the Dover Library named for her husband, Dr. Abdul Qaissaunee. She stated that another Friend of the Library, June Honeycutt, also wished to be quoted, stating: “Those of us who got behind the Friends of the Library and their efforts to urge the public to make donations to the new Library, made those donations to a Library that was and should continue to be named the Dover Public Library.” Mrs. Bresnahan advised members that she, along with her husband, were proud to sponsor a reading nook in the new Library in honor of her mother, Lorraine Napier, who taught her the love of reading and libraries. She reminded members that all raising of money for the new Library was done in the name of the Dover Public Library and felt that was what it should continue to be named. Mr. William Daisey, 215 Pine Street, relayed his support for the renaming of Court Street and felt that it should include the entire area suggested, including William Penn and Duke of York Streets. It was his feeling that if asked who William Penn or the Duke of York were, the residents of Dover would not know. He advised members that most State capitals have a street named in honor of Dr. King; however, Dover is one of the few that did not and, being the capital of the First State, Dover should not be the last to have a street named for Dr. King. He stated that most people do not fully realize what Dr. King accomplished, explaining that he supported all people and not just minorities. Mr. Daisey stated his involvement in the 1960s March on Washington with Dr. King and recalled the anger over discrimination/segregation. Without the peaceful alternative offered by Dr. King, he stated that there would have been a civil war. As a result, he stated that Dr. King prevented a civil war which would have destroyed the United States, recalling that Russia was a powerful force and would have taken over at that time. Referring to the previous comments of Delawareans speaking Dutch, it was his opinion that if there was a civil war at that time, all citizens of the United States would be speaking Russian. Considering all that Dr. King had done for all peoples, Mr. Daisey felt that Dr. King was deserving of having a prominent street named in his honor and urged members to support the proposal. Mr. Fred Tolbert, 35 Karen Place, stated that although the capital of the First State had been extremely tardy with respect to honoring Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., and there were some who opposed the proposal to rename Division Street in his honor, remarks made in opposition to this location were due to various inconveniences and costs associated with such a change. He felt it should be noted that the State of Delaware and particularly the capital city, Dover, has a history of negative attitudes toward sensitive social issues. Mr. Tolbert stated that the opposition to the original proposal by the Legislative, Finance, and Administration (LF&A) Committee was thought by many to be expected and highly questionable. He reminded members that his remarks during the Committee’s hearing on September 10, 2012, were as follows: “The renaming of a portion of Division Street to honor the name of Reverend Martin Luther King is a very small way to honor such an internationally known hero and civil rights leader. In reality, it would be significantly more appropriate to name the new Dover library after Martin Luther King and/or to erect a memorial to him in a prominent place such as: 1) the front of the new library, 2) on Loockerman Street on the islands in front of City Hall, or 3) on The Green. These suggestions are offered not as an alternative to renaming Division Street but in addition to renaming Division Street.” Mr. Tolbert felt that the LF&A Committee demonstrated the much needed strength and willingness to begin to bring the City of Dover into the mainstream thinking of America today. He also felt that the recent national

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 10, 2012 PAGE 7 election was a strong indication of the changes taking place in this country. In his opinion, the revised proposal to honor Dr. King was an acceptable alternative plan to honor America’s contemporary hero and was made even more meaningful by not only renaming Court Street, Duke of York, and William Penn Streets as Martin Luther King Street (or Boulevard) but also proposing to rename the Dover Public Library in his honor. After reviewing the proposal, he strongly encouraged approval of the proposal as presented. Ms. Annie L. Scott, 216 Saxondale Lane, referred to a letter presented by N.C. Vasuki, President of the Friends of the Dover Library, and stated that she serves as the Vice-President and is in total agreement with the comments previously made by Jim and Ann Stewart and Mr. and Mrs. Bresnahan. To avoid the appearance of obfuscating or confusing the original request to rename a Dover City street to honor Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., she felt that it would be prudent for the City to investigate the procedures used by other cities that wish to honor individuals by naming streets in their honor. She encouraged City Council to develop a carefully crafted procedure for renaming streets. Ms. Pauline Maurice Taylor, 368 Stonebrook Drive, stated confusion regarding the need to rename those streets that surround the capital building (Legislative Hall), explaining her opinion that there are some things that should remain the same (William Penn and Duke of York Streets). Not supporting the word “division,” she felt that Division Street should be renamed to honor Dr. King. She advised members that streets should be named after many people in the City of Dover and the State of Delaware, both black and white. She stated that utilizing Court, William Penn, and Duke of York Streets to honor Dr. King would be putting him in the background, where only visitors would be aware of the street name, and that William Penn and the Duke of York were famous people too and part of the founding country. Reverend John G. Moore, 216 Fairfield Drive, Magnolia, (Youth Pastor at Calvary Baptist Church located at Queen and Fulton Streets in Dover), stated that this was a historic night. He advised members that at the turn of the twentieth century, a man by the name of Charles Tinley wrote the song entitled “I Will Overcome One Day,” which had since been changed to “We Shall Overcome” and became the theme song for Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. He reminded members that Dr. King believed in the “beloved community” and that this community was totally opposite from the desegregation that was occurring in the communities of Dr. King’s time. Dr. King believed that God had birthed all children with the opportunity to be all that they could be, which was the foundation of his dream. The beloved community was themed around “integration” and that no matter the color or your skin, denomination, ethnicity, etc., one would be able to achieve their dreams because they lived in a country that made it possible. Reverend Moore stated that the City of Dover has the opportunity to reflect that beloved community. He reminded members that next year will be the celebration of the 50th anniversary of the March on Washington, where Dr. King gave his most famous speech “I Have a Dream”. Referring to the word “Dream,” he advised members that he had translated this word as follows (and suggested that all citizens of this great City should do the same): D = Dedicated (to do all that we can to make sure that the City is fair and make sure that we recognize a man who has such great history in this country); R = Resilient (regardless of the challenges and differences of opinions, the citizens are able to come together in unity); E = Enthusiasm (all should have an energy to work together to see the proposal come to fruition); A =

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 10, 2012 PAGE 8 Attitude (one that is positive and with the right attitude, anything can be accomplished); and M = Motivated (all should be motivated to put differences aside and come together as a City in unity and be able to fulfill a dream so that Dr. King, from heaven above, could say “free at last, free at last, thank God Almighty, he’s free at last.” Mr. Gerald L. Rocha, Sr., 523 Schooner Court, indicated his support for renaming Court, William Penn, and Duke of York Streets to Martin Luther King, Jr. Street (or Boulevard). It was his belief that Court Street serves as a gateway into the City of Dover. He stated that the issue is racial, since Dr. King stood for all humanity, and that he was only mentioning this due to a recent comment in a local newspaper regarding an individual being Polish and questioned what recognition they would be provided. He reminded members that Dr. King stated: “God is not interested merely in the freedom of black men, brown men, and yellow men, but God is interested in the freedom of the whole human race. Creation of a society where all men will live as brothers.” Mr. Rocha stated that Dr. King stood for equality, which leads to unity. In his military capacity as Program Manager of the Dover Air Force Base Honor Guard, his primary responsibility was ensuring the return of America’s fallen heroes, those who paid the ultimate sacrifice, with dignity, honor, and respect. He stated that Dr. King was also a hero who paid the ultimate sacrifice for humanity and that, in his capacity as a community leader, he would assume the responsibility of ensuring that Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was recognized with the dignity, honor, and respect due for a man who served as a drum major for justice, peace, and righteousness for all humanity. Mr. Ali Abdul Aleem, 138 Lingo Drive, questioned how Dr. King would view the deliberations of this matter. He felt that there was an entity that sees and hopes that the best will come from all of us and come together to help each other. He reminded members that God created each one of us and, in addition to our color, God gave us capacity. Mr. Aleem felt that if Dr. King were present, he would not be squabbling, but rather encouraging everyone to come together for the greater good of all and not to view each other as black and white but rather to see each other as good, helpmates, and as brothers and sisters. He stated that the naming of a street does not give a man honor but respecting each other and naming the street (or whatever is selected) would, since it would relay a message. Reverend Frances Benson, Pastor at John Wesley AME Church, Division Street, voiced her approval for renaming Court, Duke of York, and William Penn Streets as Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard. Although she had no objections to the inclusion of the renaming of the Dover Public Library in honor of Dr. King, she felt that the Library had its own job and that the street naming would show more for the community. She urged members to take the appropriate action and approve the renaming of the streets. Council President Leary noted the receipt of correspondence (Exhibit #1) in regard to this issue. Mr. N.C. Vasuki, 215 Carnoustie Street, advised members that he supported the renaming of the streets. He stated that he serves as President of Friends of Dover Library (and the Dover Library Foundation) and that donations continued to be sought for making future improvements. He suggested that City Council take the necessary action tonight to rename the streets as recommended.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 10, 2012 PAGE 9 Ms. Dorothy Snyder, 9 Douglas Court, stated that her comments regarding the issue had already been relayed by others who supported renaming of the streets as recommended, so it was not necessary for her to speak. Reverend Rita Paige, 355 Rita Wilma Road, stated that she is a part of the Interdenominational Ministerial Alliance (IMA) and that she agreed with much of what had been said and thanked members for the process that had been taken regarding this issue. She reminded members that the initial request was to rename Division Street in honor of Dr. King and that it was felt that was the best proposal. For those who were still in favor of Division Street, she explained that no one “gave up” on the issue or agreed to compromise, but rather used wisdom in listening to those who were in opposition and to Councilman Perza’s proposal. At that time, due to less cost and impact on people, etc., it was agreed that Court, Duke of York, and William Penn Streets would be the best proposal. Noting Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., sacrificed his life to have policy and laws changed for the betterment of all humanity, she felt that there was no better place for than those streets that are located and head in the direction of the area in which laws are changed. She encouraged members to support the proposal, which she felt to be a “win-win” for all. Reverend Michael B. Rogers, 118 Springfield Way (President of the IMA), relayed appreciation for the process that had taken place in the consideration of the request. He stated that their efforts were to seek recognition for Dr. King in Dover, Delaware, and urged members to approve the recommendation to rename Court, Duke of York, and William Penn Streets as Martin Luther King Street. Reverend Richard Avant, Pastor of Calvary Baptist Church, 9 Waterwheel Circle, commended Reverend Dixon for his recent election to City Council and acknowledged that his Pastor and Bishop were in attendance. He thanked God for utilizing Councilman Perza for providing an alternative recommendation. Referring to the recent passing of Councilwoman Sophia Russell, Reverend Avant thanked members of Council for their presence during her “going home” ceremony and for the naming of a room in the Library in her honor. Mr. Bob Federwitz, 105 Revolutionary Boulevard, thanked members for the opportunity to speak and stated that he moved to the City of Dover two (2) years ago. In doing research before their move, he advised members that he and his wife were excited to learn that the City of Dover was forward thinking, particularly in the the building of a new library. He relayed support for the renaming of the streets in honor of Dr. King; however, he felt that the library should remain as the Dover Public Library. Mr. Gene Ruane, 122 Shadow Court, read the following statement into the record: In just a few weeks the Country will celebrate a holiday in honor of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Dover has a long and cherished tradition of remembering Dr. King's memory and ideals on this day. The morning celebration at the Modern Maturity Center and the

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 10, 2012 PAGE 10 noon celebration at Delaware State University are well attended and memorable events each year. However, unlike the King January holiday, which comes just once a year, a commemorative street name provides a physically permanent memorial that is present all the time. Naming a street represents a more concrete way for Dover to display its commitment to Dr. King's memory and ideals. Or, as Councilman Lynn suggested during the Legislative & Finance Committee meeting on November 13th, remembering Dr. King's memory and ideals by renaming a street in Dover will "make King's memory more visible and personal to a larger cross section of the community." Furthermore, a street touches more people than simply naming a public building or park after him. People who wouldn't go to a building or park named for Dr. King will drive on a commemorative street for business or personal reasons, especially if the street is a gateway street into the city. They will see the name at the intersections, on signs pointing to the road, and on maps. It will pop up on Map Quest and GPS systems. More people will come into contact with it. I believe that Councilman's Perza's proposal to rename Court Street to honor Dr. King's memory best satisfies the criteria that might be used to determine where King's memory is best situated or placed within the city's streetscape. First of all, Court Street connects well with existing commemorative and historic places in the city. Secondly, as Councilman Perza noted at the Nov. 13th LF&A meeting: Court Street is a major gateway into the city and the State Capitol complex. It is a "prominent, visible thoroughfare of the Capitol that serves as an entrance to the legislative corridor which attracts attention from Delawareans and Legislators from all three counties"--and I might add, "tourists" who come regularly to see the Capitol of the First State. Court Street contains a "mixture of residential neighborhoods." With the exception of a small Route 13 strip, there is no commercial development. And, as Councilman Perza further stated: "it would minimize much of the impact mentioned" in prior hearings.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 10, 2012 PAGE 11 The cost would be less than some other proposals. And, from what I read in the minutes of this same meeting, persons who have been advocating for such a commemorative street will support the Court Street proposal. For all these reasons then, I urge the Council to designate Court Street as the street to commemorate the memory and ideals of Dr. King. Ms. Gwen Elliott, 999 Sorgham Mill Road, Magnolia, stated that public libraries throughout the State of Delaware are named after their cities and felt that naming the facility anything other than its city would be distracting, explaining that individuals would question a library’s location if named something other than the city. Dover Public Library provides information as to its exact location; therefore, she favored maintaining the Dover Public Library on the map. Mr. Philemon Hill, property owner of 3728 N. DuPont Highway, felt that the majority of the community did not favor the renaming of the library; however, they did support the renaming of Court, Duke of York, and William Penn Streets as Martin Luther King Street. He stated that according to history, before this country was founded by Columbus, Indians owned everything. Someone then came over from Europe came over and started claiming land in the name of the King/Queen. It was his hope that the Duke of York or William Penn did not steal land from the Native Americans. Mr. Hill reminded members that Dr. King was a man of peace and had the desire for everyone to have opportunities. Noting that Councilman Perza had photos of his daughters on the presentation provided, he reminded members that Dr. King also had daughters before he was assassinated and was unable to raise and teach his daughters, who did; however, grow up with a family structure. He reminded members that Dr. King tried to provide this country with a conscience and had the desire for everyone to be provided the right to express their liberty. He noted that many men and women lost their lives in order to maintain freedom. He requested that all keep freedom and be free at last. Reverend Ellis Louden, 3 Michael Court (Pastor of Mt. Zion AME Church), reminded members of the significance of the issue and the life of the community. He advised members of a trip he recently took to Seattle, Washington, where there is a major thoroughfare going through Seattle named Martin Luther King Way, and the county seat for Seattle is named for Dr. King. He felt that all have come to the conclusion that Dover, Delaware, must join the many communities who have gone through these types of processes to determine how to honor a man who was important not only to a community but important to the nation and world. He stated that it was time for members of City Council to make the historic decision to allow Dover, Delaware, to join other communities across this nation, including Seattle, Washington. There being no one else wishing to speak, Council President Leary declared the public hearing closed. Mr. Lynn advised members that he was first introduced to the issue of renaming a street in honor of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. during a Towne Point/White Oak Community Homeowners' Association Meeting. After listening to a presentation provided at that time, he realized that, for his constituents,

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 10, 2012 PAGE 12 the street renaming held significantly more import to their community than merely honoring Dr. King, including the essence of social justice and a sense of self and worth. As a result, he forwarded the issue to the LF&A Committee for their review and recommendation to City Council. Acknowledging that this had not been an easy journey, Mr. Lynn relayed appreciation to Mr. Perza for his support and for crafting a compromise that would allow this overdue honor to become a reality. He stated that their Mr. Perza's and his own daughters would stand on Martin Luther King Boulevard in several years and know that their fathers had a role in making it possible. He quoted “It shouldn’t be easy to do amazing things, then everything would be amazing. It’s the things you fight for and struggle with before earning that have the greatest worth. When something is difficult to come by, you’ll do that much more to make sure it’s even harder or impossible to lose.” Mr. Lynn moved to approve changing the name of Court Street, Duke of York Street, and William Penn Street to Martin Luther King, Jr. Boulevard; including renaming the internal drive isle within the Garden Court Apartments as Court Street and also including retaining the name Court Street for the alley street segment on the south side of the current Court Street between River Road and Cowgill Street; and that plaques and/or other demarcations be installed noting the streets formally known as Duke of York and William Penn Streets. The motion was seconded by Mr. Anderson. Mr. Perza suggested that Staff Recommendation #4 be excluded so that there would be no variation for Court Street to be reflected as north or south. Although there were no objections by the maker and seconder of the motion, it was noted that the motion did not include variations for Court Street. Mr. Bonar noted that there were no residents of Court Street who spoke either in favor of or against the renaming of the streets. He stated his support for honoring Dr. King and that the naming of a street had good intent and that renaming Court Street to Dr. Martin Luther King Boulevard was a fine gesture; however, he felt that the land located at the corner of North Street and Governors Avenue should be devoted as Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Park. It was his feeling that by utilizing a park area, a diorama could be included about Dr. King (what he went through and what he taught everyone in terms of civil rights), which would educate future generations more than simply riding on a street named in honor of Dr. King. He commended Mr. Perza for submitting a compromise on the street selected for renaming in honor of Dr. King. Referring to a statement made by Mr. Daisey, Mr. Hare stated that he agreed that as the capital of First State, it was important that Dr. King be included in the City of Dover’s history. He stated that he supported the renaming of Court Street in honor of Dr. King, particularly since it serves as a gateway to Legislative Hall and the legislative part of the capital city. However, the names provided for the Duke of York and William Penn Streets also represented the City’s history. Quoting Dr. King, Mr. Hare stated that “the process needs to be as pure as the results.” It was his feeling that if the results eliminate a significant part of Delaware’s history, then the results are not as pure as the process. He reiterated his support for the renaming of Court Street; however, he explained that he would not support the renaming of the Duke of York or William Penn Streets. Mr. Hutchison relayed appreciation to all those who participated in the process. He reminded members that Dr. King gave his life for all peoples and this is a better place today because of his efforts. He noted that there is only one (1) street in the State of Delaware that is the home of the

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 10, 2012 PAGE 13 State Capital and that is Court Street, which leads up to Legislative Hall and represents the most powerful building and serves as the home of the General Assembly, Governor, and Lt. Governor, and where laws are passed for all residents. Mr. Anderson indicated his hope that tonight, City Council would conclude the process for renaming the streets in honor of Dr. King. He felt that approval of the motion would take into consideration real people and protect them from being impacted negatively and that the impact in the community would be extraordinarily positive. Referring to the public testimony, he noted that members heard an overwhelming and united sentiment regarding this issue. He stated his willingness to consider taking action for William Penn, due to his historical significance. In addition to the proposal, he stated the importance of including part of the legislative park, at least one (1) of the streets, since there was momentum not just to name a street but to continue to build upon that legacy, and he suggested possible memorials in the future. It was Mr. Anderson’s opinion that members should also approve markers in the Legislative Mall area to recognize Duke of York and William Penn so that history is not taken away but only added to the City. Responding to Mr. Lynn, Mr. Koenig felt that it would be possible to have the new street signs in place by January 15th; however, he reminded members that City staff would need to work with the Delaware Department of Transportation (DelDOT) in making these changes. He stated that the historical markers would take longer to complete. Mr. Anderson suggested that the changes be completed by January 21st - on Martin Luther King Day. Mr. Lynn moved to amend the motion so that the dedication could take place on January 21, 2013, the day the nation celebrates Dr. Martin Luther King’s birthday, seconded by Mr. Anderson. Council President Leary felt that the proposal was more than just renaming a street. Having recently spoken during the service for the late Councilwoman Russell, he was reminded of how blessed we are to be living in the world of today. It was his feeling that renaming the street was the least City Council could do to commemorate a great man and a great movement. On a call for the question, the motion to approve changing the name of Court Street, Duke of York Street, and William Penn Street to Martin Luther King, Jr. Boulevard; also including the renaming the internal drive isle within the Garden Court Apartments as Court Street and also including retaining the name Court Street for the alley street segment on the south side of the current Court Street between River Road and Cowgill Street; and that plaques and/or other demarcations identify the streets formally known as Duke of York and William Penn Streets and that the dedication take place on January 21, 2013, on the day the nation celebrates Dr. Martin Luther King’s birthday, was carried by a roll call vote of eight (8) yes (Anderson, Dixon, Lynn, Perza, Bonar, Hutchison, and Leary), one (1) no (Hare) and one (1) absent (Williams). There being no objections, Council President Leary declared a five (5) minute recess. Meeting recessed at 9:05 p.m. and reconvened at 9:16 p.m.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 10, 2012 PAGE 14 Mrs. Ann Marie Townshend, Director of Planning and Community Development, referred to Staff Recommendation #3 and questioned if the motion included renaming the streets appropriately as north and south. Mr. Bonar moved to rename Duke of York Street as Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard North and William Penn Street as Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard South, seconded by Mr. Perza and unanimously carried. Mr. Perza commended the leadership of the “alliance,” the many, many reverends that were responsible for keeping this dream of theirs alive. He also recognized Councilman Lynn, noting that although they are political opposites, they have shared the support of honoring Dr. King, and relayed appreciation for his willingness to meet with the community and his leadership in bringing this matter forward. BOARD OF ASSESSMENT APPEALS EXEMPTION REPORT - OCTOBER 25, 2012 The Board of Assessment Appeals Committee met on October 25, 2012, with Chairman Garfield presiding. Exemptions 1. B. 1. Friends of the Capitol Theater, Inc. Location: 226 S. State Street – ED05-077.09-04-22.00 Background and Analysis An appeal form was submitted to the Assessor's Office. This property was recently added to the taxable property in July 2011. In 2000, this property was approved for a10 year property tax abatement under the Dover Downtown Development Incentives. Property taxes have been paid for 2011 & 2012. Exemption Request (2012 & future billings) $2,023,500 Representing the Friends of the Capitol Theater were the following: Connie Welde Dr. William Johnston Sylvia Cowell Sandra Conner Kim Ritter Amir Mohammadi Vita Pickrum

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 10, 2012 PAGE 15 Ms. Cowell explained to the board how important the organization is to the City of Dover and its surrounding area. She told the board that the Theater had been exempt from taxes for the past 10 years and would like to be exempt from property taxes for another 10 years. Mr. Mohammadi expressed concern about the troubling economy. He explained that when the economy is in decline, so are the ticket sales for the art center. Mr. Mohammadi told the board that the expenses for the center are currently going up while the revenue is going down. Ms. Ritter went over the program which was handed out to the board members. Mr. Burns asked the board members if the Theater had the 501(c)3 status. The members explained that the theater does have the exempt status which is consistent with Wesley College and Delaware State University. Mr. Burns asked if the organization was also exempt from taxes with the county. Mrs. Welde explained that due to the fact that the organization did not have the exempt status before the year 1987, they do not qualify for the exemption with the county. She told the board about a law that kept them from automatically getting the exemption. The organization is in the process of appealing this decision. Chairman Garfinkel wanted to make sure that everybody present knew that the purpose of the Board of Assessment Appeals was to make sure the organization falls under the requirement needed to qualify for the exemption. The Assessor wanted to clarify that the tax exemption the Theater had previously was due to a 10 year Tax Abatement, which is a program the city offers to property owners who purchase property in the Downtown Dover Area. Renovations made to the property are not taxed for 10 years while in this program. This 10 year period had just come to a close. Mr. Burns asked how the art center falls within the already exempt properties within the city, such as churches, colleges, museums, or for example the Dover Art League. He wanted to make sure the board would be consistent if they decide to grant the exemption. The Assessor explained that schools and colleges are state owned and therefore are exempt. She gave examples of other organizations which are tax exempt. Mr. Burns asked the Treasurer Mrs. Welde if the theater is able to sustain itself. Mrs. Welde explained that they are applying for grants and sponsorships which help sustain events. She told the Board that Wesley College and Delaware State University contribute on a monthly basis as well. Mrs. Welde told Mr. Burns that they are sustaining, but a lot of this is based on the contribution made by the Colleges.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 10, 2012 PAGE 16 Chairman Garfinkel asked how many board members the organization had and if this was in compliance with the bylaws of the organization. He was told that there were in all, 9 members. 3 of which were associated with Delaware State University and 3 were associated with Wesley College. The board members explained that both of these colleges help financially in keeping the doors of the theater open. When asked about the rental of the room in the Theater, the applicants present, explained that while they do have rooms for rent, the income made is used to fund expenses of the Theater. They also let area schools use the rooms. Mr. Burns was concerned that in the future the theater could start making a profit on the rental of their rooms and ticket sales and would no longer qualify for the exemption. He was wondering if there were checks and balances in place to ensure the organization still falls within the requirements of the exempt qualifications. The Assessor explained that the city can request current 501(c)3 paperwork at any time to ensure the organization still falls under the exempt status. The committee recommended honoring the request for exemption but with the stipulation that the City would request proof of the 501(c)3 status periodically. By consent agenda, Mr. Bonar moved for approval of the Committee’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Hutchison and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Williams absent). A copy of the by-laws for this organization had been requested by the board members. After reviewing these by-laws, the members of the board felt that their decision to approve the request for exemption was consistent with other exempt properties within the city. 1. C.1. Rector Wardens & Vestryman of Christ Episcopal Church Location: 509 S State St. – ED05-077.09-05-45.00 Background and Analysis An appeal form was submitted to the Assessor's Office. This property was purchased by the church in April 2012. At this time, the building is vacant. Exemption Request (2012 & future billings) $125,100

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 10, 2012 PAGE 17 Rector Weaver was present for the hearing. He told the board that the church purchased the property in April of 2012 and was planning to demolish the home on the property due to the fact that it is an eyesore and unsafe. The church is not planning on building anything on this property and therefore has no plans for this property. Mr. Burns wanted to make sure that the church has no plans to use the building in the future and that the church is actively pursuing the demolition permit. Rector Weaver assured Mr. Burns that the home located on the property is unsafe and needs to be demolished. Chairman Garfinkel asked if Rector Weaver had anything else to add, when Rector Weaver explained to the board that the church is tax exempt and that all of the properties owned by the church are used for the purpose of the church. Chairman Garfinkel asked the Assessor if she had anything to add. Ms. Russell explained to the board that all the properties adjoined to the properties, which are owned by the church, are exempt from taxes. Mr. Burns told the board that he is familiar with the property and agrees with Rector Weaver, that the building was in bad shape. Chairman Garfinkel explained that the state laws require the entity to use the property for their mission and based on what had been told the property would not be used for church purposes. Rector Weaver requested the application to be withdrawn which would give him time to prepare for the hearing. The Committee recommended acceptance of the withdrawal made by Rector Weaver. By consent agenda, Mr. Bonar moved for approval of the Committee’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Hutchison and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Williams absent). By consent agenda, Mr. Bonar moved for acceptance of the Board of Assessment Appeals Exemption Report, seconded by Mr. Hutchison and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Williams absent). UTILITY COMMITTEE REPORT - DECEMBER 10, 2012 Except for the following time sensitive issue, the Utility Committee Report from December 10, 2012 will be presented to Council during their Regular Meeting of January 14, 2013 for Council’s review and consideration.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 10, 2012 PAGE 18 Renewable Energy Portfolio Standards Mr. Scott Koenig, City Manager, introduced Mr. Patrick McCullar, President and Chief Executive Officer and Ms. Kimberly Schlichting, Vice President - Administration, both of whom were representing the Delaware Municipal Electric Cooperative (DEMEC). Mr. Koenig advised members that the Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) is a state-mandated policy that obligates each retail seller of electricity to include in its resource portfolio annually increasing amounts of electricity from Qualifying Renewable Energy Resources through 2025, when it will reach the goal of 25% with at least 3% from solar renewable resources. Qualifying Renewable Energy Resources include solar electric, wind, ocean tidal, ocean thermal, fuel cells powered by renewable fuels, hydroelectric facilities with a maximum capacity of 30 megawatts (MW), sustainable biomass, anaerobic digestion, and landfill gas. Prior to 2010, municipal electric utilities were exempted from the RPS requirements. In 2010, the Delaware RPS was revised under Senate Substitute No. 1 for Senate Bill 119 to require all utilities to participate, including municipal utilities, but allowing municipal electric companies to exempt themselves provided that they develop and implement a program comparable to the Renewable Energy Portfolio Standards for ratepayers beginning in the 2013 Compliance Year (June 1, 2013 thru May 31, 2014). There was no clear standard for a “comparable plan,” but the statute imposes an “alternative compensation payment” of $25 per megawatt-hour for non-compliance in the first year, increasing to $80 per megawatt-hour by the third year, which must be passed to consumers. For the 2013 planning year, Dover must purchase 10% of its calculated load from qualified renewable resources, including 0.6% from solar photovoltaic resources, to comply with the statute. Mr. Koenig noted that DEMEC’s draft proposal encourages qualifying renewable energy resources and provides for a five (5) year planning cycle and annual and monthly compliance reconciliation for DEMEC members. DEMEC also has entered into contracts with qualifying renewable resources that will ensure compliance for its members for five (5) years, but only through planning year 2015. He stated that compliance based upon consumption would be complicated (i.e. industrial customers with loads in excess of 1,500 kWh may apply for exemption, but they must apply, it is not assumed; surplus solar capacity and facilities with Delaware-made equipment receive a multiplier, and compliance is suspended if costs increase by 3% (1% for solar)). DEMEC’s proposal would free Dover from the process of submitting its own plan. Mr. Koenig informed members that DEMEC provides full requirements service to its members, making compliance with RPS an integral part of the services. Although Dover is a member of DEMEC, it does not have the same financial obligations as the other members. Consequently, it would be necessary for Dover to enter into additional agreements with DEMEC concerning the scope of services, planning obligations, acquisition responsibility when DEMEC acquires qualified renewable resources, and compensation to DEMEC for the term of the renewable resource contract. These and other terms would be negotiated in the months ahead. Mr. Koenig indicated that this request for action was limited solely to the joint filing of a plan. Mr. Koenig indicated that the City evaluated whether to file a separate compliance plan or to join with DEMEC. He advised members that, on the assumption that the RPS and the “circuit breaker” to protect against higher costs would remain in effect, conversations with The Energy Authority (TEA), DEMEC, and Mr. Kirk Betts, the City’s Utility Attorney, led staff to conclude that the City

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 10, 2012 PAGE 19 of Dover should join in DEMEC’s proposed RPS Plan as outlined in the Municipal Electric Utilities Renewable Portfolio Standard Plan. Staff recommended that the City join the DEMEC Renewable Portfolio Standard Plan. Mr. McCullar stated that he was present to discuss the RPS plan and the possibility of DEMEC acting as agent for the City of Dover in the implementation of the filing and compliance with the plan. He complimented Mr. Koenig on his summary of the plan and noted one (1) correction, advising members that municipal plans do not have a non-compliance penalty payment. He explained that DEMEC was given flexibility by the General Assembly to design plans and this was being done with the goal of having a plan that is fairly comparable to the plan mandated for Delmarva Power. Mr. McCullar noted that the plan would seek to minimize the impact on DEMEC’s rate payers and to stay below the circuit breakers that are built into the legislation defining RPS (1% cost of retail sales on an annual basis for solar and 3% for non-solar, such as wind and other renewables). He indicated that the plan distributed to the local regulatory authorities (municipalities) must be adopted by the local regulatory authority, and filed with the General Assembly and the Delaware Energy Office. From that point, there is an obligation to meet the compliance targets which are determined on an annual basis as a percentage of retail electric sales; for example, if a set amount of kWh is generated in a year, a schedule determines the percentage of those kWh’s that must come from Qualifying Renewable Energy Resources, and there is a subset of solar renewable energy portfolio units. Mr. McCullar advised members that a five (5) year time frame was chosen for DEMEC’s compliance plan because this is the duration of the State energy plan and also because it was felt that conditions in the electric industry and the persuasions of the General Assembly may change, causing modifications to the RPS law. He noted that DEMEC would be responsible for the compliance obligation for the other eight (8) municipal electric utilities involved. He indicated that the plan was designed in anticipation that the City of Dover would approach DEMEC to be its agent and DEMEC was prepared to do so. Mr. McCullar noted that DEMEC currently had a partial requirements agreement with the City of Dover for certain activities and that amendments would have to be made to define the responsibilities and payment obligations, should DEMEC (as the agent for Dover and the other eight (8) municipal electric utilities) acquire renewable energy resources or build them to create a supply that meets compliance obligations. Responding to Mr. Hutchison, Mr. McCullar stated that DEMEC’s contract with the City would extend through 2025, since it was known that there was an absolute compliance obligation that 25% of DEMEC’s energy resources come from renewables at that time. Decisions would be made in five (5) year increments regarding what “the curve would look like” to meet the 25%. If the DEMEC Board of Directors (including Mr. Koenig) were to decide that a project must be built or a contract for output from a particular project to meet the compliance obligation in 2025 was necessary, an agreement would be put in place that would allow the City of Dover to participate in that economic project and have part of their compliance obligation met. In response to Mr. Bonar, Mr. McCullar reassured members that Mr. Koenig would be a voting member of the DEMEC Board of Directors. He stated that no legislative approval would be needed to amend the original plan if the City were to enter into the agreement with DEMEC. He explained that the municipal plans are viewed as nine (9) separate plans, since the legislation requires that each local regulatory authority have a plan; however, the DEMEC Board agreed that the best approach

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 10, 2012 PAGE 20 for all concerned was to have a unified plan with nine (9) separate reporting categories. He noted that the composition of the electric customer base is different in each community. Mr. McCullar indicated that industrial customers with a 1,500 KW demand can exempt themselves. He stated that regulations had very recently been changed to state that industrial customers are automatically exempt and need not apply. Mr. McCullar noted that DEMEC would advise each community of its annual sales and the percentage of these sales that come from qualifying industrial customers, and this would be subtracted from their obligation. He informed members that the City of Dover has quite a few qualifying customers (as does Newark); however, the Towns of Clayton and Smyrna have very few; therefore, a higher percentage of their total sales would be subject to compliance. As the annual compliance reporting is performed, DEMEC would make calculations to determine the actual year-to-year obligations and show how this was met with qualifying resources. In response to Mr. Bonar, Mr. McCullar confirmed that DEMEC would be responsible if they were unable to meet the specified goals; however, he noted that “there is very little in the plan” that allows for a penalty and that new legislation would have to be passed to impose a penalty on DEMEC. Noting that the City’s solar plan ran “full bore,” generating 3% of the City’s electric supply during the previous summer, Mr. Snaman inquired about sources of renewable energy other than wind and solar. Responding, Mr. McCullar noted that there was a variety of sources, including geothermal, heated water solar, tidal, and small hydro energy, and that wind produces the most efficiency. DEMEC had a contract for wind energy for a project proposed by Bluewater Wind; however, this facility was never built. Mr. McCullar noted that DEMEC worked closely with the University of Delaware and that Professor Willett Kempton, from the University, performed a number of studies on wind resources in Delaware and discovered that there was not enough efficiency in wind resources to build wind farms in the State. He advised members that one (1) windmill was running in Lewes (a University of Delaware project) and, although it receives the benefit of offshore winds, its efficiency is “not too great.” He explained that DEMEC recently had Duke Energy build a 69 MW commercial wind farm operation on top of a mountain ridge in north central Pennsylvania where there was very good wind efficiency and DEMEC will receive 100% of the energy from this facility, which will serve the organization’s non-solar renewable energy credit compliance for quite a few years into the future. In response to Mr. Snaman regarding plans for other renewable energy projects, Mr. Koenig explained that the City was being approached by various solar developers (at least two (2) specifically) and stated that the Renewable Portfolio Standard Plan must be put in place before additional solar construction was considered. He noted that this was likely to come up in the future. Responding to Mr. Snaman, Mr. McCullar stated that natural gas did not qualify as renewable energy. He indicated that the General Assembly allowed for a fuel cell powered by natural gas and that carbon-based resources would not qualify. Mr. McCullar stated that DEMEC’s plan as the administrator would be to identify the most economic and efficient projects that can be put in with the goal of creating the least burden possible on rate payers while maintaining compliance.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 10, 2012 PAGE 21 The Committee recommended that the City join the Delaware Municipal Energy Cooperative (DEMEC) Renewable Portfolio Standard Plan, as recommended by staff. During the Council Meeting, at the request of Mr. Bonar, Mr. Koenig briefed members regarding this matter. Mr. Bonar moved for approval of the Committee’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Hutchison. Mr. Anderson stated his opinion that the RPS mandates that have been opposed were wrong. He stated that the idea that 25% of the State’s energy is going to come from renewable sources was a fantasy. He explained that this idea would not come to fruition unless there was rationing and cost rationing. He felt that the State should come to reality and noted that the RPS were already costing the rate payers of the State a great deal of money and that Delaware has some of the highest electric rates in the country due to these mandates that were wrong. Responding to Mr. Lynn, Mr. Koenig stated that he was not aware of any statutory financial impact should the City elect not to join the Delaware Municipal Energy Cooperative Renewable Portfolio Standard Plan. However, he stated that the City was required to file a plan with the State Energy Office and that staff had elected to do so by joining the Delaware Municipal Energy Cooperative Renewable Portfolio Standard Plan since it would put all the State’s municipalities on the same level “playing field.” Although he understood the objections and concerns regarding the RPS, he reminded members that it was currently the law. He felt that the City could make rational arguments to amend the law but, at this time, the City needed to abide by the current law as written. Mr. Koenig assured members that approval of the Committee’s recommendation would put the City in compliance with the law. He also indicated that the Governor’s Office had been very clear that the municipal electric rates were a concern. Concurring with Mr. Anderson, Mr. Bonar stated that this particular action would put the City in line with the rules and regulations mandated by the legislature. He felt that although the City may not have financial repercussions at the present time, if the City did not join the other municipalities and file along with DEMEC according to the standards, the legislators could, at a later date, decide to enact penalties that may have an adverse impact on the City in general. Mr. Anderson stated that although there may be a rational basis to approve the recommendation, he also believes there was a rational basis for sending a message, even a temporary one, in hopes that the legislators would “wake up.” In response to Mr. Hare, Mrs. Mitchell explained that the law requires the municipality to show that a plan has been filed and approved by the municipality’s governing body. She stated that if City Council approved the Committee’s recommendation, the City would have met the law. The Plan had been prepared to meet the standards and had been prepared on behalf of all utilities. She also indicated that action to meet the law must be accomplished by January 1, 2013.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 10, 2012 PAGE 22 On a call for the question by Mr. Hare, the motion to approve the Committee’s recommendation for acceptance of staff's recommendation that the City join the Delaware Municipal Energy Cooperative (DEMEC) Renewable Portfolio Standard Plan was carried by a roll call vote of six (6) yes (Dixon, Lynn, Bonar, Hare, Hutchison, and Leary), two (2) no (Anderson and Perza), and one (1) absent (Williams). MONTHLY REPORTS - OCTOBER 2012 By motion of Mr. Bonar, seconded by Mr. Hutchison, the following monthly reports were accepted by consent agenda: Budget City Assessor City Manager City Planner Dover Fire Department Economic Development Office EVALUATION OF BIDS - ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING SERVICES Mr. Scott Koenig, City Manager, advised members that the City of Dover Electric Department was continuously working on various electric system upgrades which include future capacity and future growth projects. These projects require numerous hours of engineering design, as well as value engineering and estimating. Earlier this year, staff solicited Requests for Qualifications (RFQs) to provide electrical engineering services on a project by project (on-call) basis. Seven (7) submissions were received, reviewed, and analyzed by City staff. After careful review, staff felt that both Pike Energy Solutions and Power Consulting Engineers (PCE) had all of the necessary experience and staff to perform any of the requested work without using sub-consultants. In light of the number of projects to be undertaken in the Capital Investment Plan (CIP), staff felt it would be in the City’s best interest to award a contract to both firms. Mr. Koenig indicated that this would allow the Electric Department the flexibility to choose one (1) of the firms based on their availability, expertise, and workload on a project by project basis. The total cost over the term of each contract would likely exceed $25,000; however, the costs would be reflected in the appropriate project budget or line item. He assured members that all awards under this contract that exceed $25,000 would be brought back to City Council for award on the individual project basis. Staff recommended awarding a three (3) year contract with two (2) one (1) year extensions to Pike Energy Solutions, LLC and Power Consulting Engineers (PCE) per their rate sheets included in the referenced RFQ. Responding to Mr. Perza, Mr. Koenig stated that approval of the recommendation would essentially award two (2) separate contracts; however, he reiterated that all awards under the contracts that exceed $25,000 would be brought back for Council’s review and approval.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 10, 2012 PAGE 23 Mr. Bonar moved for approval of staff’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Anderson and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Williams absent). EVALUATION OF BIDS - WESLEY COLLEGE STREETSCAPE ENHANCEMENT, PHASE I Mr. Scott Koenig, City Manager, reminded members that Wesley College had requested a new parking lot on their campus, located on 22, 28 and 34 South State Street. The new parking lot would also include demolition of an existing accessory building, storm sewer installation, and curb installation. An easement was dedicated to the property for public use of the parking lot, thus allowing use of Community Transportation Funds (CTF). However, he noted that certain improvements within the project fall outside of the easement area. This portion of the work would be paid for by the City of Dover with reimbursement by Wesley College. The City was in receipt of a letter dated July 25, 2012 from Dr. Johnston indicating that Wesley College would reimburse the City. Mr. Koenig stated that the total amount anticipated to be reimbursed is $4,083.98. The Department of Public Works created bid documents and worked with the CTF Division of the Delaware Department of Transportation (DelDOT) to acquire the proper funding from local legislators to fund this project. Staff recommended approval of the low bid submitted by Corrado Construction Co., in the amount of $96,976.57. Mr. Bonar moved for approval of staff’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Anderson and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Williams absent). APPOINTMENTS RECOMMENDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT LEARY Council President Leary requested approval of the following appointments: Parks, Recreation, and Community Enhancement Committee - Terms to Expire May 2013 David L. Bonar, Chairman (to fill the unexpired term of Sophia R. Russell) Wallace R. Dixon (to fill the unexpired term of David L. Bonar - appointed as Chairman) Safety Advisory and Transportation Committee - Term to Expire May 2013 Wallace R. Dixon (to fill the unexpired term of Sophia R. Russell) By consent agenda, Mr. Bonar moved for approval of the appointments as recommended by Council President Leary, seconded by Mr. Hutchison and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Williams absent). FINAL READING - PROPOSED ORDINANCE #2012-23 The First Reading of Proposed Ordinance #2012-23 - FY13 Budget Revisions was accomplished during the Council Meeting of November 26, 2012. Mr. Bonar moved that the Final Reading of the proposed ordinance be acknowledged by title only, seconded by Mr. Dixon and unanimously carried.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 10, 2012 PAGE 24 Mrs. Donna Mitchell, Controller/Treasurer, reviewed those changes that would be incorporated into the FY13 Budget as a result of the adoption of Ordinance #2012-23. Mr. Bonar moved for adoption of Ordinance #2012-23 (Exhibit #2), seconded by Mr. Dixon and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Williams absent). COUNCIL MEMBERS ANNOUNCEMENTS Mayor Carey congratulated Councilman Dixon on his recent election to serve as a Fourth District Councilman. He also relayed appreciation for the work done by everyone on the renaming of streets to honor Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Mayor Carey wished all a very Merry Christmas and a Happy Holiday Season. Mr. Perza advised members that he traveled around the City in the evening to enjoy the holiday displays and was very impressed with those located on Oak Drive, Yearsley Avenue, South Bradford Street, and Lotus Street (all located within the Second District). Mr. Hare noted the difficulty getting across streets while traveling through the City on Loockerman Street due to those who are attempting to make left-hand turns onto Governors Avenue, etc. He suggested that this matter be referred to the Safety Advisory and Transportation Committee to consider the possibility of prohibiting left-hand turns during certain time periods. Council President Leary reminded everyone that the next regularly scheduled Council Meeting would be held on January 14, 2013; however, he noted that a Council Workshop had been scheduled to be held on January 7, 2013 to discuss financial issues. Council President Leary wished all a Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays and suggested that they enjoy the season with their family and friends. Without objection, Council President Leary declared the meeting adjourned at 9:46 p.m. TRACI A. McDOWELL CITY CLERK All orders, ordinances, and resolutions adopted by City Council during their Regular Meeting of December 10, 2012, are hereby approved. CARLETON E. CAREY, SR. MAYOR /TM/jg S:\AGENDAS-MINUTES-PACKETS\Council-Minutes\2012\12-10-2012.wpd Exhibits Exhibit #1 - Correspondence - Renaming of Streets in Honor of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Exhibit #2 - Ordinance #2012-23 - FY13 Budget Revisions

Exhibit #1 Council Meeting December 10, 2012

FINAL READING CITY OF DOVER ORDINANCE # 2012-23 Exhibit #2 2012-2013 BUDGET ORDINANCES Council Meeting December 10, 2012 GENERAL FUND - REVENUES AND BUDGET 1 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL ME 2 The amount hereinafter named aggregating Thirty Eight Million, Five Hundred Four Thousand, 3 Seven Hundred dollars ($38,504,700) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby 4 appropriated from current revenues and other funds for the use by several departments of the 5 Municipal Government for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2012 and ending June 30, 2013: 6 ORIGINAL REVISED 7 2012/13 2012/13 8 BUDGET BUDGET 9 RECEIPTS 10 BEGINNING BALANCE 2,666,600 2,734,400 11 12 FINES AND POLICE REVENUE 668,000 668,000 13 INVESTMENT INCOME 75,000 75,000 14 LIBRARY REVENUES 66,200 66,200 15 KENT COUNTY BOOK REIMBURSEMENT 405,900 405,900 16 BUSINESS LICENSES 1,455,000 1,455,000 17 PERMITS AND OTHER FEES 1,053,300 1,053,300 18 MISCELLANEOUS CHARGES 55,500 55,500 19 POLICE EXTRA DUTY 494,400 494,400 20 PROPERTY TAXES 10,997,400 11,063,400 21 BID REVENUE 51,600 51,600 22 RECREATION REVENUE 130,000 130,000 23 FRANCHISE FEE 550,000 550,000 24 SANITATION FEES 2,690,200 2,690,200 25 RENT REVENUE - GARRISON FARM 62,000 62,000 26 COURT OF CHANCERY FEES 753,800 753,800 27 RECEIPTS SUBTOTAL 19,508,300 19,574,300 28 INTERFUND SERVICE RECEIPTS 29 INTRAFUND SERVICE RECEIPTS W/WW 1,104,600 1,104,600 30 INTRAFUND SERVICE RECEIPTS ELECTRIC 3,224,500 3,224,500 31 INTERFUND SERVICE RECEIPTS SUBTOTAL 4,329,100 4,329,100 32 GRANTS: 33 POLICE RELATED/EXTRA DUTY 85,000 85,000 34 POLICE PENSION GRANT 500,000 500,000 35 GREEN ENERGY GRANT 98,500 98,500 37 MISC GRANT REVENUE 25,000 25,000 39 GRANTS SUBTOTAL 708,500 708,500 40 TRANSFERS FROM: 41 TRANSFER TAX 1,370,000 1,370,000 42 MUNICIPAL STREET AID 527,400 527,400 43 CIVIL TRAFFIC PENALTIES 750,000 750,000 44 WATER/WASTEWATER 500,000 500,000 45 ELECTRIC 8,000,000 8,000,000 47 VERIZON AND CI RESERVES 11,000 11,000 50 TRANSFERS FROM SUBTOTAL 11,158,400 11,158,400 51 52 TOTAL REVENUES 35,704,300 35,770,300 53 54 TOTAL BEGINNING BALANCE & REVENUE 38,370,900 38,504,700

Final Reading F13 Budget Amendment & Ordinance #2012-23 2 of 11 55 GENERAL FUND EXPENSE SUMMARY 56 ORIGINAL REVISED 57 2012/13 2012/13 58 BUDGET BUDGET 59 DEPARTMENT EXPENSES: 60 CITY CLERK 326,900 326,900 61 COUNCIL 114,200 114,200 62 TAX ASSESSOR 187,500 187,500 63 FIRE 688,300 688,300 64 GROUNDS MAINTENANCE 993,300 1,008,100 65 LIBRARY 1,250,200 1,250,200 66 RECREATION 713,400 715,400 67 LIFE SAFETY 469,900 471,200 68 CODE ENFORCEMENT 293,100 295,100 69 PLANNING 410,300 412,300 70 INSPECTIONS 592,200 596,900 71 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 231,100 231,100 72 POLICE 13,195,200 13,195,200 73 POLICE EXTRA DUTY 579,400 579,400 74 STREETS 756,700 772,200 75 SANITATION 2,140,700 2,152,800 76 CITY MANAGER 420,000 420,000 77 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 642,700 642,700 78 FINANCE 879,500 879,500 79 PUBLIC SERVICES - ADMINISTRATION 468,600 472,600 80 FACILITIES MANAGEMENT 678,800 683,500 81 CENTRAL SERVICES 576,900 578,200 82 FLEET MAINTENANCE 712,700 716,100 83 CUSTOMER SERVICE 901,200 901,200 84 HUMAN RESOURCES 319,700 319,700 85 MAYOR 82,400 82,400 86 DEPARTMENT SUBTOTALS 28,624,900 28,692,700 87 OTHER EXPENDITURES: 88 DEBT SERVICE 624,200 624,200 89 CONTRIBUTION TO DDP 180,000 180,000 90 MISCELLANEOUS GRANT RELATED EXPENSES 25,000 25,000 91 INSURANCE 600,000 600,000 92 RETIREES HEALTH CARE 1,620,600 1,620,600 93 OTHER EMPLOYMENT EXPENSES 463,400 463,400 94 GENERAL PENSION UNFUNDED LIABILITY 1,310,500 1,310,500 95 POLICE PENSION FUND - STATE GRANT 500,000 500,000 96 POLICE PENSION UNFUNDED LIABILITY 95,000 95,000 97 UNCOLLECTIBLES - TRASH AND OTHER 10,000 10,000 99 STREET LIGHTS 869,700 869,700 100 OTHER EXPENSE SUBTOTAL 6,298,400 6,298,400 101 TRANSFERS 102 TRANSFER TO CAPITAL FUND - PROJECTS 613,400 613,400 103 TRANSFERS SUBTOTAL 613,400 613,400 104 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 35,536,700 35,536,700 105 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE 2,834,200 2,968,000 106 TOTAL BUDGET BALANCE & EXPENDITURES 38,370,900 38,504,700

Final Reading F13 Budget Amendment & Ordinance #2012-23 3 of 11 107 GOVERNMENTAL CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND SUMMARY 108 ORIGINAL REVISED 109 2012/13 2012/13 110 BUDGET BUDGET 111 BEGINNING BALANCE 294,400 241,100 112 BEGINNING BALANCE - Library Project - (95,500) 113 REVENUES 114 STATE GRANTS - Library 884,200 1,746,000 115 PROPOSED BOND/BANK PROCEEDS - Library 317,500 648,500 116 INCOME FROM SALE OF ASSETS 1,200,000 1,200,000 117 LIBRARY FOUNDATION DONATIONS - 71,000 118 KENT COUNTY CONTRIBUTION - 250,000 119 FRIENDS OF THE LIBRARY DONATION - 102,400 120 DEMEC GRANT - 166,700 121 PROPOSED BANK PROCEEDS - Streets 2,000,000 2,000,000 122 PROPOSED BANK PROCEEDS - Garrison 2,000,000 - 123 STATE GRANTS - DEMA 108,000 158,000 124 POLICE GRANTS 33,800 33,800 125 MUNICIPAL STREET AID CAPITAL CONTRIBUTION - 132,200 126 TRANSFER FROM FUTURE CAPACITY RESERVE - 2,000,000 127 TRANSFER FROM GENERAL FUND 613,400 613,400 128 TOTAL REVENUES 7,156,900 9,122,000 129 TOTAL BEGINNING BALANCE & REVENUES 7,451,300 9,267,600 130 EXPENDITURES 131 FIRE 238,500 238,500 132 GROUNDS MAINTENANCE 112,000 112,000 133 LIBRARY 2,535,000 4,089,100 134 RECREATION 30,000 30,000 135 POLICE 197,000 197,000 136 STREETS 1,974,000 2,144,200 137 SANITATION 150,000 150,000 138 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 57,000 107,000 139 FACILITIES MANAGEMENT 381,000 381,000 140 MAYOR 33,000 33,000 141 DEPARTMENT SUBTOTAL 5,707,500 7,481,800 142 TRANSFERS & MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES 143 BOND/LOAN ISSUANCE COST 56,000 - 144 TRANSFER TO COMMUNITY TRANS FUND 1,606,700 1,606,700 145 TRANSFERS & MISCELLANEOUS SUBTOTAL 1,662,700 1,606,700 146 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 7,370,200 9,088,500 147 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE 81,100 179,100 148 TOTAL BUDGET BALANCE & EXPENDITURES 7,451,300 9,267,600

Final Reading F13 Budget Amendment & Ordinance #2012-23 4 of 11 149 WATER/WASTEWATER FUND SUMMARY 150 ORIGINAL REVISED 151 2012/13 2012/13 152 BUDGET BUDGET 153 154 BEGINNING BALANCE - WATER 865,100 884,600 155 BEGINNING BALANCE - WASTEWATER 853,000 867,800 156 BEGINNING BALANCE - KCSA (553,500) (553,500) 157 TOTAL BEGINNING BALANCES 1,164,600 1,198,900 158 BASE REVENUE: 159 WATER FEES 4,730,700 4,730,700 160 WASTEWATER FEES 3,834,600 3,834,600 161 WASTEWATER ADJUSTMENT FEES 3,090,800 3,090,800 162 GROUNDWATER INFLOW ADJUSTMENT 1,257,600 1,257,600 163 WATER TANK SPACE LEASING 313,500 313,500 164 SEWER IMPACT FEES 317,000 317,000 165 WATER IMPACT FEES 350,000 350,000 166 INTEREST - WATER 8,700 8,700 167 INTEREST - WASTEWATER 17,100 17,100 168 MISCELLANEOUS SERVICE FEE 77,000 77,000 169 TOTAL REVENUES 13,997,000 13,997,000 170 TOTAL BEGINNING BALANCE & REVENUES 15,161,600 15,195,900 171 DIRECT EXPENSES: 172 ENGINEERING & INSPECTION 597,900 601,900 173 WATER CONSTRUCTION 345,700 352,400 174 WATER DEPARTMENT 408,200 415,000 175 WATER TREATMENT PLANT 1,522,600 1,535,400 176 WASTEWATER DEPARTMENT 993,000 997,000 177 DIRECT EXPENDITURE SUBTOTAL 3,867,400 3,901,700 178 OTHER EXPENSES: 179 DEBT SERVICE - WATER 532,100 532,100 180 DEBT SERVICE - WASTEWATER 731,500 731,500 181 RETIREES HEALTH CARE 220,000 220,000 182 OTHER EMPLOYMENT EXPENSES 16,200 16,200 184 PENSION UNFUNDED LIABILITY 309,800 309,800 185 KENT COUNTY TREATMENT CHARGE 3,600,000 3,600,000 186 INTRAFUND SERVICE FEES 1,235,400 1,235,400 187 UNCOLLECTIBLES 5,000 5,000 188 INVENTORY/FIXED ASSET WRITEOFFS 5,000 5,000 189 OTHER EXPENSES SUBTOTAL 6,655,000 6,655,000 190 TRANSFER TO: 191 GENERAL FUND FROM WATER 250,000 250,000 192 GENERAL FUND FROM WASTEWATER 250,000 250,000 193 WATER IMP AND EXT 1,700,000 1,700,000 194 WASTEWATER IMP AND EXT 1,200,000 1,200,000 199 CAPITAL ASSET RESERVE WATER 70,000 70,000 200 CAPITAL ASSET RESERVE WASTEWATER 22,000 22,000 201 TRANSFER TO SUBTOTAL 3,492,000 3,492,000 202 TOTAL EXPENSES 14,014,400 14,048,700 203 BUDGET BALANCES 204 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE WATER 482,700 482,700 205 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE WASTEWATER 664,500 664,500 207 SUBTOTAL CURRENT YEAR BALANCES 1,147,200 1,147,200 208 TOTAL BUDGET BALANCES & EXPENSES 15,161,600 15,195,900

Final Reading F13 Budget Amendment & Ordinance #2012-23 5 of 11 209 WATER/WASTEWATER IMPROVEMENT & EXTENSION FUND 210 ORIGINAL REVISED 211 2012/13 2012/13 212 BUDGET BUDGET 213 BEGINNING BALANCE - WATER 3,071,800 3,811,200 214 BEGINNING BALANCE - WASTEWATER 1,013,600 2,641,000 217 TOTAL BEGINNING BALANCES 4,085,400 6,452,200 218 REVENUES 219 BOND PROCEEDS - WATER - 2013 ISSUE 2,000,000 2,000,000 220 BOND PROCEEDS - WASTEWATER - 2013 ISSUE 2,000,000 2,000,000 221 TRANS FR OPERATING FUND FOR WATER 1,700,000 1,700,000 222 TRANS FR OPERATING FUND FOR WASTEWATER 1,200,000 1,200,000 223 TRANSFER FR WATER IMPACT FEE RESERVE 250,000 250,000 224 TRANSFER FR WASTEWATER IMPACT FEE RES 300,000 300,000 225 PROCEEDS FROM SALE OF ASSETS - - 226 INTEREST INCOME 25,000 25,000 227 TOTAL REVENUES 7,475,000 7,475,000 228 TOTAL BEGINNING BALANCES & REVENUES 11,560,400 13,927,200 229 EXPENSES 230 WATER 5,140,000 5,762,600 231 WASTEWATER 3,817,300 5,798,400 232 WATER TREATMENT PLANT 24,100 24,100 233 WATER CONSTRUCTION 31,000 31,000 234 ENGINEERING & INSPECTION 23,400 23,400 235 BOND ISSUANCE COST & DEBT SERVICE RESERVE 344,000 344,000 236 TOTAL EXPENSES 9,379,800 11,983,500 237 CUREENT YEAR BALANCE - WATER 1,655,500 1,772,300 238 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE - WASTEWATER 525,100 171,400 239 TOTAL ENDING BUDGET BALANCES 2,180,600 1,943,700 240 TOTAL BUDGET BALANCES & EXPENSES 11,560,400 13,927,200

Final Reading F13 Budget Amendment & Ordinance #2012-23 6 of 11 241 ELECTRIC REVENUE FUND SUMMARY 242 ORIGINAL REVISED 243 2012/13 2012/13 244 BUDGET BUDGET 245 BEGINNING BALANCE 7,184,000 7,201,500 246 BASE REVENUE: 247 DIRECT SALES TO CUSTOMER 85,071,400 85,071,400 249 UTILITY TAX 1,595,200 1,595,200 250 MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE 850,700 850,700 251 RENT REVENUE 225,000 225,000 252 GREEN ENERGY 129,000 129,000 253 INTEREST EARNINGS 107,800 107,800 256 TRANSFER FROM RATE STABILIZATION 5,400,000 5,400,000 257 INTRAFUND SERVICE RECEIPTS W/WW 130,800 130,800 258 TOTAL REVENUES 93,509,900 93,509,900 259 TOTAL BEGINNING BALANCE & REVENUES 100,693,900 100,711,400 260 EXPENSES: 261 POWER SUPPLY - HEDGED ENERGY 39,468,900 39,468,900 262 PJM CHARGES - PURCHASED ENERGY 17,508,300 13,752,300 263 PJM CHARGES - TRANSMISSION & FEEES - 3,756,000 264 SOLAR ENERGY 1,414,500 1,414,500 265 SOLAR RENEWAL ENERGY CREDITS - 351,600 266 CAPACITY CHARGES - LOAD 12,564,800 12,564,800 267 POWER SUPPLY MANAGEMENT 996,000 996,000 268 SUB-TOTAL POWER SUPPLY 71,952,500 72,304,100 269 PLANT OPERATIONS 5,914,900 5,914,900 270 GENERATIONS FUELS 586,000 586,000 271 PJM SPOT MARKET ENERGY - (1,124,300) 272 PJM CREDITS (1,199,700) (427,000) 273 CAPACITY CREDITS (14,318,600) (14,318,600) 274 GENERATION SUBTOTAL (9,017,400) (9,369,000) 275 POWER SUPPLY & GENERATION SUBTOTAL 62,935,100 62,935,100 276 DIRECT EXPENDITURES 277 TRANSMISSION/DISTRIBUTION 3,223,600 3,233,700 278 ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING 1,163,900 1,171,300 279 ADMINISTRATION 501,200 501,200 280 METER READING 212,500 212,500 281 SYSTEMS OPERATIONS 517,600 517,600 282 DIRECT EXPENDITURE SUBTOTALS 5,618,800 5,636,300 283 OTHER EXPENSES: 284 UTILITY TAX 1,595,200 1,595,200 285 ALLOW FOR UNCOLLECTIBLES 150,000 150,000 286 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES - RFP'S 190,000 190,000 287 RETIREES HEALTH CARE 696,500 696,500 288 OTHER EMPLOYMENT EXPENSES 157,900 157,900 289 TRANSFER TO PENSION UNFUNDED LIABILITY 1,074,200 1,074,200 291 GREEN ENERGY PAYMENT TO DEMEC 129,000 129,000 292 INTRAFUND SERVICE FEES 3,224,500 3,224,500 293 INTEREST ON DEPOSITS 35,000 35,000 294 INVENTORY WRITE OFFS 175,000 175,000 297 DEBT SERVICE 3,323,600 3,323,600 298 OTHER EXPENSES SUBTOTAL 10,750,900 10,750,900 299 TRANSFER TO: 300 IMPROVEMENT & EXTENSION 3,500,000 3,500,000 301 GENERAL FUND 8,000,000 8,000,000 307 TRANSFER TO SUBTOTAL 11,500,000 11,500,000 308 TOTAL EXPENSES 90,804,800 90,822,300 309 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE 9,889,100 9,889,100 310 TOTAL BUDGET BALANCE & EXPENSES 100,693,900 100,711,400

Final Reading F13 Budget Amendment & Ordinance #2012-23 7 of 11 311 ELECTRIC IMPROVEMENT & EXTENSION FUND SUMMARY 312 ORIGINAL REVISED 313 2012/13 2012/13 314 BUDGET BUDGET 315 BEGINNING BALANCE 2,714,600 3,534,600 316 REVENUE 317 TRANSFER FROM ELECTRIC 3,500,000 3,500,000 318 TRANSFER FROM FUTURE CAPACITY RESERVE 550,000 550,000 319 INTEREST EARNINGS 40,700 40,700 320 TOTAL REVENUES 4,090,700 4,090,700 321 TOTAL BEGINNING BALANCE & REVENUE 6,805,300 7,625,300 322 EXPENSES 323 ELECTRIC GENERATION 1,441,300 1,786,600 324 TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION 596,000 896,000 325 ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING 1,932,700 1,942,800 326 TOTAL EXPENSES 3,970,000 4,625,400 327 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE 2,835,300 2,999,900 328 TOTAL BUDGET BALANCE & EXPENSES 6,805,300 7,625,300

Final Reading F13 Budget Amendment & Ordinance #2012-23 8 of 11 329 MUNICIPAL STREET AID 330 ORIGINAL REVISED 331 2012/13 2012/13 332 BUDGET BUDGET 333 BEGINNING BALANCE 100 132,200 334 REVENUES 335 STATE GRANTS 527,400 659,600 336 TOTAL REVENUES 527,400 659,600 337 TOTAL BEGINNING BALANCE & REVENUES 527,500 791,800 338 EXPENDITURES 339 STREET IMPROVEMENTS - 264,300 340 TRANSFER TO GENERAL FUND 527,400 527,400 341 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 527,400 791,700 342 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE 100 100 343 TOTAL BUDGET BALANCE & EXPENDITURES 527,500 791,800

Final Reading F13 Budget Amendment & Ordinance #2012-23 9 of 11 344 LIBRARY GRANT 345 ORIGINAL REVISED 346 2012/13 2012/13 347 BUDGET BUDGET 348 BEGINNING BALANCE - 30,000 349 REVENUE 350 STATE GRANT 280,500 280,500 351 TOTAL REVENUE 280,500 280,500 352 TOTAL BEGINNING BALANCE & REVENUE 280,500 310,500 353 EXPENDITURES 354 FURNITURE/FIXTURES 52,300 62,900 355 PROGRAM EXPENSES/SUPPLIES 15,300 17,100 356 OFFICE SUPPLIES 15,000 15,000 357 PRINTING & DUPLICATING 9,500 9,800 358 POSTAGE 200 200 359 BOOKS 95,000 95,000 360 COMPUTER HARDWARE 20,000 20,000 361 AUDIO VISUAL SUPPLIES 65,000 65,000 362 TRAINING/CONF/FOOD/TRAV 4,000 4,000 363 OFF EQP/REPAIRS & MAINT 4,200 4,200 364 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 280,500 293,200 365 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE - 17,300 366 TOTALS 280,500 310,500

Final Reading F13 Budget Amendment & Ordinance #2012-23 10 of 11 367 POLICE GRANTS 368 ORIGINAL REVISED 369 2012/13 2012/13 370 BUDGET BUDGET 371 PRIOR YEAR BALANCE - 178,400 372 REVENUE 373 GRANTS RECEIVED 382,600 429,400 374 INTEREST INCOME - - 375 TOTAL REVENUE 382,600 429,400 376 TOTALS 382,600 607,800 377 EXPENDITURES 378 FURNITURE & FIXTURES - 15,000 379 OFFICE & COMPUTER SUPP - - 380 PHOTO EQUIPT & SUPPLIES - - 381 POLICE EQUIPT & PROG SUPP 64,000 87,000 382 UNIFORMS & BODY ARMOR - - 383 TECHNOLOGY EQUIPMENT 57,000 57,000 384 BUILDING IMPROVEMENTS - - 385 CELL PHONE CHARGES 15,000 15,000 386 TRAINING 17,000 27,000 387 AUDIT FEES 1,000 1,000 389 OTHER EQUIPMENT - 25,000 390 VEHICLE PURCHASE 10,500 10,500 391 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 164,500 222,500 392 OTHER FINANCING USES 393 OPERATING TRANSFERS-OUT 218,100 242,400 394 TOTAL FINANCING USES 218,100 242,400 395 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE - 142,900 396 TOTALS 382,600 607,800 397 THE ABOVE BUDGET INCLUDES THE POLICE GRANTS FUND, USDOJ BYRNE GRANTS FUND AS WELL AS THE OTHER FEDERAL POLICE GRANTS FUND.

Final Reading F13 Budget Amendment & Ordinance #2012-23 11 of 11 398 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) 399 ORIGINAL REVISED 400 2012/13 2012/13 401 BUDGET BUDGET 402 BEGINNING BALANCE - 16,200 403 REVENUE 404 FEDERAL GRANT 235,300 317,200 405 TOTAL REVENUE 235,300 317,200 406 TOTAL BEGINNING BALANCE & REVENUE 235,300 333,400 407 EXPENDITURES 408 SALARIES 38,300 38,300 409 FICA TAXES 2,900 2,900 410 WORKER'S COMPENSATION 200 200 411 PENSION 2,300 2,300 412 OPEB 3,300 3,300 413 COMMUNITY REVITAL. INFRASTRUCTURE - 60,100 414 CLOSING COST & DOWNPAYMENT PROGRAM 30,000 36,000 415 DOVER INTERFAITH MINISTRY 27,500 34,600 416 FIRST STATE RES CONSV & DEV 35,000 41,900 417 ELIZABETH W MURPHEY SCHOOL 20,000 20,000 418 NCALL RESEARCH 7,800 7,800 419 SERENITY PLACE 28,000 28,000 420 MILFORD HOUSING H/O REHAB PROGRAM 40,000 41,800 421 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 235,300 317,200 422 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE - 16,200 423 TOTALS 235,300 333,400 Actions History December 10, 2012 Scheduled for Final Reading by Council November 27, 2012 - First Reading by Council November 13, 2012 - Considered by Legislative, Finance and Administration Committee

Certificate of Appreciation presented to Tonda Parks, Chairperson, Downtown Dover Partnership Marketing and Promotions Committee in appreciation for executing the Winter Wonderland Project, resulting in the beautification of Downtown Dover. We thank you for your continued contribution to the Dover community. January 14, 2013 ___________________ ___________________ Carleton E. Carey, Sr. Thomas J. Leary Mayor Council President

PARKS, RECREATION, AND COMMUNITY ENHANCEMENT COMMITTEE The Parks, Recreation, and Community Enhancement Committee Meeting was held on December 10, 2012, at 12:00 p.m. with Acting Chairman Bonar presiding. Members present were Mr. Anderson and Mrs. Horsey. Mr. Lewis was absent. AGENDA ADDITIONS/DELETIONS By unanimous consent, the agenda was accepted as presented. Presentation - Economic Development Programs and Opportunities Available for the City of Dover by Dr. Michael Casson, Director, University Center for Economic Development and International Trade; Associate Professor of Economics; Dean, School of Graduate Studies and Research, Delaware State University Dr. Michael Casson, Delaware State University (DSU), acknowledged the recent passing of Councilwoman Sophia Russell, noting that Mrs. Russell was a close friend, a tireless activist for the City of Dover, and that she was missed by all. Dr. Casson advised members that he grew up in the Dover area and the benefit of this community was close to his heart. He expressed his pleasure at the economic progress made in the City to date and his excitement to be part of its future. He explained that the DSU Center for Economic Development and International Trade (UCEDIT) has been funded for five (5) years through the U.S. Department of Commerce Economic Development with the goal of supporting economic development initiatives throughout the State, and specifically in Kent and Sussex Counties. He noted that he was happy to be working with Mr. Bill Neaton, City of Dover Economic Development Director, and stated that Mr. Neaton had put forth some very good ideas and helped the City to make great strides. Dr. Casson reviewed a presentation entitled “Economic Development Strategies for the City of Dover.” Referring to Strategy 2: Business Development, Mr. Anderson stated that the Delaware Department of Labor (DOL) offers programs that pay the equivalent of unemployment to individuals who have been laid off or who want to start a business, such as contracting, which provides a basis for business start up. Noting that DSU has an excellent Small Business Development Center on campus, he inquired if DSU could coordinate with the DOL to make DOL program participants aware of the expertise available through the Small Business Development Center and other programs offered. Responding, Dr. Casson stated the coordination of enterprises and support services is very important if UCEDIT and Delaware Economic Development Office (DEDO) programs are to achieve the greatest impact for the City of Dover. He stated the possibility of tying “Pop-Up” projects to tax incentive and business incubation opportunities. Clarifying, Mr. Neaton explained that Project Pop-Up is a DEDO initiative whereby landlords agree to provide three (3) months of free leasing and DEDO supplies approximately $500 toward interior renovations if needed. The goal is to allow businesses to get started with virtually no cost so that empty and vacant buildings will be filled.

PARKS, RECREATION, AND COMMUNITY ENHANCEMENT COMMITTEE MEETING OF DECEMBER 10, 2012 PAGE 2 Responding to Mr. Bonar regarding participants in the City, Mr. Neaton advised members that three (3) potential Pop-Up projects for the City were approved through DEDO and staff is currently working with one (1) applicant (associated lease negotiations took place earlier that morning). The other two (2) opted not to participate. He noted that the program would end on December 31, 2012; however, it may continue if successful. Mr. Neaton explained that a monthly meeting called “Kent is Open for Business” is held at Kent County Levy Court, and agencies such as the SCORE Foundation, (previously known as the Service Core of Retired Executives; now recognized as “Counselors to America’s Small Business”) Small Business Administration, DSU, Delaware Technical and Community College (DT&CC), the Downtown Dover Partnership, the City’s Economic Development Office, and the Central Delaware Chamber of Commerce all participate to assist fledgling businesses get started. He noted that during this group’s meeting held the previous week, it was decided to enhance the focus to concentrate on businesses that wish to expand and to expand marketing of Kent is Open for Business. Mr. Neaton stated that the operation has been successful and the group had counseled 200 businesses. Dr. Casson stated that if programs such as the Pop-Up Project or the Blue Collar Project (which provides customized training for businesses) are coordinated with small business assistance, this optimizes the chance for success and the City can bring about higher yields by taking advantage of support services from DEDO and DSU, as well as interregional cooperation with the County. Responding to Mr. Bonar, Dr. Casson stated that he was unaware of funding opportunities that would allow representatives from the City to travel to other areas to solicit business; however, he indicated that he would research possible funding. Mr. Neaton noted that travel would become more important when the infrastructure at the Garrison Tract was completed and it becomes a certified “shovel-ready” site. Referring to Tax Increment Financing (TIF), Mr. Anderson inquired if this approach had been utilized in Delaware and if measures should be sought through the General Assembly to make this opportunity more viable in Delaware. Responding, Dr. Casson stated that a study must first be performed to determine which district would be identified as a TIF area and a structure could then be devised. Mr. Bonar noted that TIF, Payment-in-Lieu of Taxes (PILOT), and projects that require inkind contributions all cost money and that a method of repaying funds would have to be established. He indicated that there may be other creative approaches and expressed his hope that the Committee would be supportive of them. Mr. Anderson noted that TIF would be favorable in some respects because it sets aside financing. For example, he noted that if the runway at the Civil Air Terminal were upgraded to allow cargo, the additional revenue realized could be used to pay off financing. Mr. Bonar advised members that he and Mr. Anderson attended a seminar at the National League of Cities Conference in November 2012 which addressed the importance of strategizing and sustaining economic development. He felt that it was important that the City not “pull its head in like a turtle”and stagnate, but make efforts to continue to sell the City.

PARKS, RECREATION, AND COMMUNITY ENHANCEMENT COMMITTEE MEETING OF DECEMBER 10, 2012 PAGE 3 Concurring, Dr. Casson stated that businesses can only cut costs so much and must continue to think “top line growth” and consider new initiatives. Mr. Anderson indicated that he was pleased to see local use of tax incentive programs such as the Rehabilitation Tax Credit (RTC) program, which was recently used for a project undertaken by Mr. Henry Mast. He advised members that there are entire markets, such as the Washington, DC area, where businesses in redeveloping areas sell tax credits to obtain more favorable financing. He expressed his hope that over the next year a competitive strategy could be developed to utilize this 4% incentive and suggested that the City partner with DSU to build data to begin seeking competitive grants. Concurring, Dr. Casson stated that he was working with Mr. Neaton on a report to target techniques to market the Garrison Tract utilizing North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) data. Mr. Anderson expressed his concern about economic inclusion being part of the economic development strategy. He felt that there were insufficient government funds to rebuild neighborhoods; therefore, individuals would have to rebuild and improve their living situation themselves. He noted that this could only be accomplished if income earned was greater than minimum wage. He questioned how this could be incorporated in an economic development strategy so that, as the City starts to turn around, “all the boats would be lifted.” Dr. Casson stated that education must be attacked concurrently because turning the City around would be dependent on the education and skill of its citizens, since this affects the attraction of potential businesses. For this reason, DSU was communicating with DT&CC, the University of Delaware, and Wesley College regarding workforce development classes. Mr. Anderson noted that Chesapeake College in Maryland has a program that allows individuals to get an accredited high school diploma. As a private school, this college can set its own qualifications and participants are not required to meet the two (2) year foreign language requirement which the State of Delaware was now “pushing.” Mr. Anderson felt that this requirement was a barrier for individuals who wish to obtain Graduation Equivalency Degrees (GEDs). He suggested, since DSU was planning to support high schools with the opening of a new magnet school, that a private adult evening high school program (that would not have to comply with the two (2) year foreign language requirement) could be considered. Dr. Casson indicated that this matter could be discussed by all parties as plans and strategies are developed. Responding to Mrs. Horsey regarding “grandfathering” provisions related to the foreign language requirement, Mr. Anderson stated that individuals who are currently in the GED program are exempt from the requirement and that those who are interested in obtaining GED certificates are being encouraged to sign on to the program this year to avoid this intimidating barrier. Referring to Strategy 6: Land Supply, Dr. Casson stated that he and Mr. Neaton had discussed the size of the parcels in the Garrison Tract and were examining which industries were yielding high-paying jobs and larger parcels. He noted this was important because it would correlate directly

PARKS, RECREATION, AND COMMUNITY ENHANCEMENT COMMITTEE MEETING OF DECEMBER 10, 2012 PAGE 4 with the types of jobs that would be developed. He noted that the City had done a good job in moving the Garrison Tract forward and assembling land parcels and that an accurate land inventory was also needed. Responding to Mr. Anderson regarding the potential economic impact of DSU’s new neuroscience program, Dr. Casson explained that UCEDIT hoped to determine how DSU’s research agenda could be tied to the development efforts in the City of Dover and Kent and Sussex Counties. Mr. Anderson requested that Dr. Casson coordinate and keep the City informed of what it could do as part of this effort. He noted that the City of Newark lost opportunities to coordinate in a similar fashion with the University of Delaware and expressed his wish to avoid this. Mr. Bonar indicated his appreciation for the presentation and stated his view that the City should engage more with DSU and in economic development in general. He stated the importance of determining how research and development businesses could be brought to the Garrison Tract and enhance the projects that are already planned there, as well as locating land to attract this type of businesses for future endeavors. Mr. Bonar felt that a Civic Center and minor sports league teams should have been brought to Dover many years ago as they would attract businesses in Dover and Kent County. He stated that these enterprises would be expensive and require partnership and that DSU and the University of Delaware could collaborate with the City in these efforts. Mr. Neaton stated that a meeting was scheduled in the boardroom at DSU at 10:00 a.m. on the following day to discuss these issues. Mr. Anderson expressed his hope that a 15-minute version of Dr. Casson’s presentation could be placed on the City Council agenda within the next month or two (2). Concurring, Mr. Bonar stated that he would present this matter at the next Council President’s agenda meeting. Mr. Neaton advised members that Dr. Casson had provided the start of an economic and market feasibility analysis for the Garrison Tract and, at Councilman Bonar’s request, agreed to send this analysis to all Committee members. (City Clerk’s Office Note: This analysis was emailed to all members of Council and the Committee by Mr. Neaton on December 12, 2012.) Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Action Plan Amendment Mrs. Tracey Harvey, Planner I, advised members that expenditure of FY 2011 CDBG funding previously allocated for a chair lift in City Council Chambers had been postponed to allow the City to evaluate other alternatives for providing American Disabilities Act (ADA) compliant access to City Council Chambers. She explained that delay of this project could cause problems in meeting the timeliness standard for expending CDBG funds (April 30, 2013). Mrs. Harvey indicated that 65% of the City’s FY 2012 Homeownership Assistance Program funding had been expended; however, three (3) families were currently mortgage ready, shopping for homes, and would need settlement assistance in order to purchase homes in the City of Dover. If funding were reallocated to this program, it was expected that funds would be expended within the next 60 days.

PARKS, RECREATION, AND COMMUNITY ENHANCEMENT COMMITTEE MEETING OF DECEMBER 10, 2012 PAGE 5 Staff recommended that $20,000 in FY 2011 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funding be reallocated from American Disabilities Act (ADA) improvements in Council Chambers to the FY 2012 Homeownership Assistance Program. In response to Mr. Bonar regarding the impact of removing the $20,000 that was originally allocated for improvements to Council Chambers, Mr. Scott Koenig, City Manager, stated that staff had obtained a quote of approximately $16,000 - $17,000 to install a chairlift in the Chambers; however, this could potentially change the floor configuration. He explained that a general discussion regarding City facilities, including City Hall, the former library, and the building at 5 East Reed Street, was planned for the Council Financial Workshop scheduled for January 7, 2013. Mr. Koenig stated that if consideration amounts to only a broad discussion at that time, staff would return to the Committee to request money to modify Council Chambers. However, he noted that staff recommended moving the funds to the Homeownership Assistance Program at this time due to the need to comply with CDBG timeliness requirements. Mr. Anderson moved to recommend acceptance of staff’s recommendation, seconded by Mrs. Horsey. Mr. Anderson noted that when CDBG grants were allocated, members were in favor of allocating more funds to home repairs and questioned why the full $20,000 was being allocated to homeownership. Mrs. Harvey explained that the Housing Rehabilitation Program formerly managed by the City was transferred to the Milford Housing Development Corporation (MHDC) and $60,000 was allocated to this program. However, MHCD was experiencing difficulty qualifying applicants on their waiting list and it was not expected that the organization’s CDBG funding would be expended until later in the year. Staff believed that this funding could be spent more expeditiously through the Homeownership Assistance Program, which has a waiting list of people who are mortgage ready. On a call for the question, the motion to recommend acceptance of staff’s recommendation to reallocate $20,000 in FY 2011 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds from American Disabilities Act (ADA) improvements in Council Chambers to the FY 2012 Homeownership Assistance Program was unanimously carried (Lewis absent). UPDATES CDBG Program Mrs. Tracey Harvey, Planner I, advised members that Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) contracts were signed in October, projects were currently underway, and grantees had begun to expend funds. In regard to the Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP), she stated that nine (9) homes (one (1) of which was a rental) had been sold and the remaining home was occupied through a lease/purchase agreement. Mrs. Harvey explained that since additional program income

PARKS, RECREATION, AND COMMUNITY ENHANCEMENT COMMITTEE MEETING OF DECEMBER 10, 2012 PAGE 6 remained in the NSP program, funding would be reallocated for an NSP program to provide additional down payment assistance for qualified applicants to receive up to $20,000 toward the purchase of an abandoned or vacant property located in the City of Dover. Responding to Mr. Bonar, Mrs. Harvey explained the applicant income is restricted to 120% of the area median income and this figure is based on family size and income. Schutte Park Space - Boys and Girls Club/CDSA Mr. Scott Koenig, City Manager, stated that the Boys and Girls Club plans to enter into an agreement with Kent County for a location off New Burton Road. He stated his belief that a legal agreement had been developed but was unsure if it had been signed. In the interest of public disclosure, Mr. Bonar stated that he serves on the fundraising organization for that group and acknowledged that a signed agreement was imminent. Mr. Koenig stated that once the agreement was signed, this item would be removed from future Parks, Recreation, and Community Enhancement Committee agendas. In recent weeks, the County held a groundbreaking ceremony for the Kent Sports Center and he believed that the Central Delaware Soccer Association (CDSA) may move programming to that location; however, no official word had been received. He speculated that if this occurs, additional space may become available at Schutte Park at some point. Mrs. Ann Marie Townshend, Director of Planning and Community Enhancement, stated her understanding that CDSA planned to move their travel league to the new Sports Center, which would allow them to move the recreational program from Schutte Park to the Lewis Road site. She indicated that a girls’ lacrosse league had expressed interest in using one of the three (3) field areas at Schutte Park on Saturdays in the spring; the other two (2) areas were available and two (2) will be available for CDSA; however, they have not made contact to reserve them. In response to Mr. Bonar regarding the financial implications of CDSA’s move, Mr. Koenig stated that a great deal of revenue was not involved and the change may actually prove beneficial. Concurring, Mrs. Townshend stated that it has been difficult to accommodate other interested parties since CDSA utilized the fields all day long every Saturday and staff felt that the loss in soccer revenue could result in a gain in lacrosse revenue. She indicated that the recreational staff was also considering starting a City recreational soccer league to service City residents without transportation if CDSA moves out of the City. By unanimous consent, the meeting adjourned at 1:04 p.m. David L. Bonar Acting Chairman DLB/TM/js/mk/dd S:\AGENDAS-MINUTES-PACKETS\Committee-Minutes\2012\12-10-2012 PR&CE.wpd

UTILITY COMMITTEE The Utility Committee Meeting was held on December 10, 2012 at 5:00 p.m. with Chairman Bonar presiding. Members present were Mr. Perza (arrived at 5:16 p.m.), Mr. Blakeman, and Mr. Snaman. Mrs. Williams was absent. Members of Council present were Mr. Anderson (arrived at 5:17 p.m.), Mr. Hutchison, and Council President Leary. Mayor Carey was also present. AGENDA ADDITIONS/DELETIONS By unanimous consent, the agenda was approved as presented. Capital School District Impact Fee Transfer Mr. Scott Koenig, City Manager, advised members that the Public Works Department and the Planning Department had been working with the Capital School District for a number of months on their Facilities Master Plan. He explained that the Capital School District recently constructed a new campus at 194/198 Commerce Way in Dover (Tax Parcel ED05-076.14-01-07.03). Within the campus, the Office of Technology/Maintenance Facility building is located at 194 Commerce Way and the Administration and Professional Development Center building is located at 198 Commerce Way. These facilities were formerly located on multiple properties owned by the District and have been consolidated on this property. Mr. Koenig noted that in both the water impact fee and the sewer impact fee ordinances, there is language that allows (with Council approval) the transfer of impact fees from properties where facilities have been demolished to properties where facilities are being constructed or expanded. Construction of these new facilities allowed for demolition of existing structures on the subject site as well as the previous maintenance building, administration building, and trailers at 211 Delaware Avenue (Tax Parcel ED05-068.17-03-66.00), 945 Forest Street (Tax Parcel #ED05-076.07-01-65.00), and 75 Carver Road (Tax Parcel #ED05-076.07-01-55.00), respectively. The Capital School District submitted a letter, dated November 9, 2012, requesting the transference of thirteen (13) Equivalent Dwelling Unit (EDU) credits from the three (3) previously referenced off-site locations to the new campus on Commerce Way. Mr. Koenig advised members that, per the City of Dover Code of Ordinances, two (2) references are applicable to this request. The first code reference, located in Chapter 110, Article III – Water Service, Division 3 – Water Impact Fees, Section 110-208 (d), states “No EDUs shall be transferred from one property to another property, whether or not such properties are owned by the same person, without the approval of city council.” The second code reference, located in Chapter 110, Article IV – Wastewater Service, Division 3 – Wastewater Impact Fees, Section 110-283 (c), states “No EDUs shall be transferred from one property to another property, whether or not such properties are owned by the same person, without the approval of city council.” Mr. Koenig stated that City staff reviewed the request and found the information consistent with the calculations provided by the Department of Public Works on November 5, 2012. Staff found the request reasonable and recommended the transference of thirteen (13) EDU credits from 211 Delaware Avenue, 945 Forest Street, and 75 Carver Road to the Capital School District Administration and Professional Development Center campus located at 194/198 Commerce Way (Tax Parcel #ED05-076.14-01-07.03). He noted that any redevelopment and/or expansion at the

UTILITY COMMITTEE MEETING OF DECEMBER 10, 2012 PAGE 2 three (3) locations generating the credits would be subject to all impact fees resulting from new EDUs assessed at that time. Mr. Koenig stated his belief that the District was on a temporary Certificate of Occupancy at the administration complex pending the resolution of this matter, as well as some landscaping issues related to the site plan. Mr. Blakeman moved to recommend acceptance of staff’s recommendation to transfer 13 Equivalent Dwelling Unit (EDU) credits from 211 Delaware Avenue, 945 Forest Street, and 75 Carver Road to the Capital School District Administration and Professional Development Center campus located at 194/198 Commerce Way (Tax Parcel #ED05-076.14-01-07.03). The motion was seconded by Mr. Snaman and unanimously carried. Renewable Energy Portfolio Standards Mr. Scott Koenig, City Manager, introduced Mr. Patrick McCullar, President and Chief Executive Officer and Ms. Kimberly Schlichting, Vice President - Administration, both of whom were representing the Delaware Municipal Electric Cooperative (DEMEC). Mr. Koenig advised members that the Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) is a state-mandated policy that obligates each retail seller of electricity to include in its resource portfolio annually increasing amounts of electricity from Qualifying Renewable Energy Resources through 2025, when it will reach the goal of 25% with at least 3% from solar renewable resources. Qualifying Renewable Energy Resources include solar electric, wind, ocean tidal, ocean thermal, fuel cells powered by renewable fuels, hydroelectric facilities with a maximum capacity of 30 megawatts (MW), sustainable biomass, anaerobic digestion, and landfill gas. Prior to 2010, municipal electric utilities were exempted from the RPS requirements. In 2010, the Delaware RPS was revised under Senate Substitute No. 1 for Senate Bill 119 to require all utilities to participate, including municipal utilities, but allowing municipal electric companies to exempt themselves provided that they develop and implement a program comparable to the Renewable Energy Portfolio Standards for ratepayers beginning in the 2013 Compliance Year (June 1, 2013 thru May 31, 2014). There was no clear standard for a “comparable plan,” but the statute imposes an “alternative compensation payment” of $25 per megawatt-hour for non-compliance in the first year, increasing to $80 per megawatt-hour by the third year, which must be passed to consumers. For the 2013 planning year, Dover must purchase 10% of its calculated load from qualified renewable resources, including 0.6% from solar photovoltaic resources, to comply with the statute. Mr. Koenig noted that DEMEC’s draft proposal encourages qualifying renewable energy resources and provides for a five (5) year planning cycle and annual and monthly compliance reconciliation for DEMEC members. DEMEC also has entered into contracts with qualifying renewable resources that will ensure compliance for its members for five (5) years, but only through planning year 2015. He stated that compliance based upon consumption would be complicated (i.e. industrial customers with loads in excess of 1,500 kWh may apply for exemption, but they must apply, it is not assumed; surplus solar capacity and facilities with Delaware-made equipment receive a multiplier, and compliance is suspended if costs increase by 3% (1% for solar)). DEMEC’s proposal would free Dover from the process of submitting its own plan.

UTILITY COMMITTEE MEETING OF DECEMBER 10, 2012 PAGE 3 Mr. Koenig informed members that DEMEC provides full requirements service to its members, making compliance with RPS an integral part of the services. Although Dover is a member of DEMEC, it does not have the same financial obligations as the other members. Consequently, it would be necessary for Dover to enter into additional agreements with DEMEC concerning the scope of services, planning obligations, acquisition responsibility when DEMEC acquires qualified renewable resources, and compensation to DEMEC for the term of the renewable resource contract. These and other terms would be negotiated in the months ahead. Mr. Koenig indicated that this request for action was limited solely to the joint filing of a plan. Mr. Koenig indicated that the City evaluated whether to file a separate compliance plan or to join with DEMEC. He advised members that, on the assumption that the RPS and the “circuit breaker” to protect against higher costs would remain in effect, conversations with The Energy Authority (TEA), DEMEC, and Mr. Kirk Betts, the City’s Utility Attorney, led staff to conclude that the City of Dover should join in DEMEC’s proposed RPS Plan as outlined in the Municipal Electric Utilities Renewable Portfolio Standard Plan. Staff recommended that the City join the DEMEC Renewable Portfolio Standard Plan. Mr. McCullar stated that he was present to discuss the RPS plan and the possibility of DEMEC acting as agent for the City of Dover in the implementation of the filing and compliance with the plan. He complimented Mr. Koenig on his summary of the plan and noted one (1) correction, advising members that municipal plans do not have a non-compliance penalty payment. He explained that DEMEC was given flexibility by the General Assembly to design plans and this was being done with the goal of having a plan that is fairly comparable to the plan mandated for Delmarva Power. Mr. McCullar noted that the plan would seek to minimize the impact on DEMEC’s rate payers and to stay below the circuit breakers that are built into the legislation defining RPS (1% cost of retail sales on an annual basis for solar and 3% for non-solar, such as wind and other renewables). He indicated that the plan distributed to the local regulatory authorities (municipalities) must be adopted by the local regulatory authority, and filed with the General Assembly and the Delaware Energy Office. From that point, there is an obligation to meet the compliance targets which are determined on an annual basis as a percentage of retail electric sales; for example, if a set amount of kWh is generated in a year, a schedule determines the percentage of those kWh’s that must come from Qualifying Renewable Energy Resources, and there is a subset of solar renewable energy portfolio units. Mr. McCullar advised members that a five (5) year time frame was chosen for DEMEC’s compliance plan because this is the duration of the State energy plan and also because it was felt that conditions in the electric industry and the persuasions of the General Assembly may change, causing modifications to the RPS law. He noted that DEMEC would be responsible for the compliance obligation for the other eight (8) municipal electric utilities involved. He indicated that the plan was designed in anticipation that the City of Dover would approach DEMEC to be its agent and DEMEC was prepared to do so. Mr. McCullar noted that DEMEC currently had a partial requirements agreement with the City of Dover for certain activities and that amendments would have to be made to define the responsibilities and payment obligations,

UTILITY COMMITTEE MEETING OF DECEMBER 10, 2012 PAGE 4 should DEMEC (as the agent for Dover and the other eight (8) municipal electric utilities) acquire renewable energy resources or build them to create a supply that meets compliance obligations. Responding to Mr. Hutchison, Mr. McCullar stated that DEMEC’s contract with the City would extend through 2025, since it was known that there was an absolute compliance obligation that 25% of DEMEC’s energy resources come from renewables at that time. Decisions would be made in five (5) year increments regarding what “the curve would look like” to meet the 25%. If the DEMEC Board of Directors (including Mr. Koenig) were to decide that a project must be built or a contract for output from a particular project to meet the compliance obligation in 2025 was necessary, an agreement would be put in place that would allow the City of Dover to participate in that economic project and have part of their compliance obligation met. In response to Mr. Bonar, Mr. McCullar reassured members that Mr. Koenig would be a voting member of the DEMEC Board of Directors. He stated that no legislative approval would be needed to amend the original plan if the City were to enter into the agreement with DEMEC. He explained that the municipal plans are viewed as nine (9) separate plans, since the legislation requires that each local regulatory authority have a plan; however, the DEMEC Board agreed that the best approach for all concerned was to have a unified plan with nine (9) separate reporting categories. He noted that the composition of the electric customer base is different in each community. Mr. McCullar indicated that industrial customers with a 1,500 KW demand can exempt themselves. He stated that regulations had very recently been changed to state that industrial customers are automatically exempt and need not apply. Mr. McCullar noted that DEMEC would advise each community of its annual sales and the percentage of these sales that come from qualifying industrial customers, and this would be subtracted from their obligation. He informed members that the City of Dover has quite a few qualifying customers (as does Newark); however, the Towns of Clayton and Smyrna have very few; therefore, a higher percentage of their total sales would be subject to compliance. As the annual compliance reporting is performed, DEMEC would make calculations to determine the actual year-to-year obligations and show how this was met with qualifying resources. In response to Mr. Bonar, Mr. McCullar confirmed that DEMEC would be responsible if they were unable to meet the specified goals; however, he noted that “there is very little in the plan” that allows for a penalty and that new legislation would have to be passed to impose a penalty on DEMEC. Noting that the City’s solar plan ran “full bore,” generating 3% of the City’s electric supply during the previous summer, Mr. Snaman inquired about sources of renewable energy other than wind and solar. Responding, Mr. McCullar noted that there was a variety of sources, including geothermal, heated water solar, tidal, and small hydro energy, and that wind produces the most efficiency. DEMEC had a contract for wind energy for a project proposed by Bluewater Wind; however, this facility was never built. Mr. McCullar noted that DEMEC worked closely with the University of Delaware and that Professor Willett Kempton, from the University, performed a number of studies on wind resources in Delaware and discovered that there was not enough efficiency in wind resources to build wind farms in the State. He advised members that one (1) windmill was running

UTILITY COMMITTEE MEETING OF DECEMBER 10, 2012 PAGE 5 in Lewes (a University of Delaware project) and, although it receives the benefit of offshore winds, its efficiency is “not too great.” He explained that DEMEC recently had Duke Energy build a 69 MW commercial wind farm operation on top of a mountain ridge in north central Pennsylvania where there was very good wind efficiency and DEMEC will receive 100% of the energy from this facility, which will serve the organization’s non-solar renewable energy credit compliance for quite a few years into the future. In response to Mr. Snaman regarding plans for other renewable energy projects, Mr. Koenig explained that the City was being approached by various solar developers (at least two (2) specifically) and stated that the Renewable Portfolio Standard Plan must be put in place before additional solar construction was considered. He noted that this was likely to come up in the future. Responding to Mr. Snaman, Mr. McCullar stated that natural gas did not qualify as renewable energy. He indicated that the General Assembly allowed for a fuel cell powered by natural gas and that carbon-based resources would not qualify. Mr. McCullar stated that DEMEC’s plan as the administrator would be to identify the most economic and efficient projects that can be put in with the goal of creating the least burden possible on rate payers while maintaining compliance. Mr. Blakeman moved to recommend acceptance of staff’s recommendation that the City join the Delaware Municipal Energy Cooperative (DEMEC) Renewable Portfolio Standard Plan, seconded by Mr. Snaman and unanimously Carried. (City Clerk’s Office Note: Due to time constraints, this item was placed on the Council agenda for the meeting being held later in the evening.) Quarterly Review of Utility Related Capital Investment Plan (CIP) (Electric and Water/Wastewater (Deferred by Committee on November 13, 2012 Due to Time Constraints) Mr. Scott Koenig, City Manager, referred members to the September 30, 2012 Capital Investment Plan (CIP) Project Tracking Report and stated that the report encompassing the period through December would be discussed during the second meeting in January. TEA/NAES Report (August and September) (August Report Deferred by Committee on November 13, 2012 Due to Time Constraints) Mr. Scott Koenig, City Manager, referred members to the August and September TEA/NAES Reports. Mr. Blakeman expressed his appreciation to Mrs. Donna Mitchell, Controller/Treasurer, for the modifications made to the report format, stating that the information was exactly what he had hoped for.

UTILITY COMMITTEE MEETING OF DECEMBER 10, 2012 PAGE 6 UPDATES Green Energy Funding and Programming Mr. Scott Koenig, City Manager, referred members to the Funding Summary for Green Energy projects, noting that Page 2 of the summary reflected a large financial commitment to the Dover Public Library. He stated that, as of December 5, 2012, the City had made a request to the Delaware Municipal Energy Cooperative (DEMEC) for the transference of approximately $152,000 related to Green Energy funding in association with the library. Mr. Koenig indicated that the City was nearing the initial set-aside for the Dover Public Library, as envisioned when the financing plan was developed by Mr. Anthony DePrima, former City Manager. He stated that no new applications had been received in the last few months, to his knowledge, and the City was working its way through the final funding of projects that had been submitted to date. National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Municipial Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4) Permit Mr. Scott Koenig, City Manager, stated that Planning Department staff had been working with the State on updates to the City’s plan. The City was in the process of obtaining reauthorization from the State for a new permit; however, staff at the State level had changed and he was unsure if these positions had been filled, so the City had the benefit of having additional time before a new permit must be implemented. He informed members that staff had worked through the issues identified in the City’s old permit and was continuing to collect data and make improvements to the City’s system to ensure compliance when a new permit is issued. Garrison Oak Technology Park Project (Deferred by Committee on November 13, 2012 Due to Time Constraints) Mr. Scott Koenig, City Manager, stated that it was his understanding that Becker Morgan would be submitting the final subdivision plans for Garrison Oak within the next week to the City, the agencies associated with stormwater review, and the Delaware Department of Transportation (DelDOT). The City had gone through re-engineering of some site utilities to accommodate the Calpine project and was progressing with water tower, pump station, and force main design. Staff met with the Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control (DNREC) during the previous week regarding water allocation permits and ways to enhance water production throughout the City. Staff was reasonably comfortable with the introduction of Unit 1 into the system and was attempting to get all allocation permits in line. Mr. Koenig explained that the demand that will be placed on the water system if Unit 2 is triggered would require the development of additional water resources over a specific time horizon; however, staff was focusing on the first 309 MW of power. Staff’s expectation was that Calpine would file for building permits during the January-February time frame and was planning to go into commercial operation in June of 2015, which would require testing of the facility under full load in early January of 2015. He stated that Calpine had indicated that they were ready to proceed but, as of the previous week, was waiting on their air permit, although it was anticipated that this would be filed quickly. Mr. Koenig informed members that easements were being developed from the Calpine site to the 230 kV tie site, and one

UTILITY COMMITTEE MEETING OF DECEMBER 10, 2012 PAGE 7 of the hurdles being worked on was obtaining an alignment for the wire to go from the Garrison Energy Center to the 230 kV tie. This matter was under private negotiations with Calpine and other interested parties. The issue regarding the filing of LS Power vs. the City of Dover Planning Commission was unresolved; however, Mr. Koenig stated that he was assured that this was being worked on by Calpine and LS Power. Responding to Mr. Hutchison regarding the status of the gas line, Mr. Koenig stated that he had not heard anything for or against the gas main. He indicated that his assumption was that everything necessary to get the gas line to the area was moving forward. By unanimous consent, the Meeting Adjourned at 5:27 P.M. David L. Bonar Chairman DLB/TM/dd/mk/js S:\AGENDAS-MINUTES-PACKETS\Committee-Minutes\2012\12-10-2012 UTILITY.wpd

LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE The Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee meeting was held on December 10, 2012, at 6:00 p.m. with Chairman Lynn presiding. Members present were Mr. Anderson, Mr. Rushe, and Mr. Shevock. Mr. Hare was absent. Members of Council present were Council President Leary, Mr. Hutchison, and Mr. Bonar. Mayor Carey was also present. AGENDA ADDITIONS/DELETIONS By unanimous consent, the agenda was approved as presented. Reduced Rates for All-Electric Homes in December, January, and February During the Open Forum Segment of the April 9, 2012 City Council Meeting, Mr. Ted George, 77 Billings Drive, requested that members consider providing an electric rate discount during the months of December, January, and February for those customers with all-electric homes. During the Regular Council Meeting of July 9, 2012, City Council approved the recommendation of the Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee that the proposal to reduce electric rates for all-electric homes be referred to staff for cost analysis and review. During the City Council Meeting of September 24, 2012, Council approved the Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee’s September 10, 2012 recommendation that the proposal to reduce electric rates for all-electric homes be referred back to staff for a more in-depth analysis, and that staff determine the cost for the City to administer such a program (including whether an additional employee would be necessary) and the number of houses that would be involved, and provide a cost analysis to determine whether the program would be cost effective for the City based on the additional cost to the City versus the savings that would be realized by the customers. Mr. Anderson stated that it had been several months since the item was originally proposed and that a refresher from the citizen who brought the matter before the Committee would be helpful. Mr. Anderson moved to suspend the rules to allow Mr. George to speak prior to staff’s presentation. The motion was seconded by Mr. Rushe and unanimously carried. Mr. Ted George, 77 Billings Drive, reminded members that in June 2012 he presented a proposal relating to a policy that was in effect in the City of Dover for 14 years. He stated that when his home was built in 1972, Mr. Conrad Hebert, who was the City’s Chief Engineer, suggested the use of a heat pump or strip heat to heat his home because a 20% discount on the electric rate was being offered by the City and the 6.5 cents per kilowatt charge would be reduced to 5.0 cents during the months of December, January and February. Mr. George indicated that he was a newlywed at that time with children and working full time, and the rate reduction was the deciding factor for the heating method he chose. He advised members that in the 1980s the City’s police force was expanded and the electric rate reduction was discontinued to help support the Police Department’s staffing needs. Mr. George stated that as a result of Council’s delay in addressing this issue due to their desire for further review, the month of December was now almost over; however, he proposed a rate reduction for the 88 days remaining through February, the coldest time of the year, so that people could heat their homes to a reasonably comfortable level without paying a great deal of money for electricity. (City Clerk’s Office Note: City records indicate that Mr. Hebert was the Power Plant Superintendent)

LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MEETING OF DECEMBER 10, 2012 PAGE 2 In response to Mr. Bonar’s inquiry regarding the potential impact of the proposed policy on the average residential user, Mr. Lynn indicated that Mr. Scott Koenig, City Manager, would be addressing this. Mr. George estimated the monthly savings to be $14,000 - $18,000 collectively for residents who have all-electric homes. Mr. Koenig reviewed a memo dated December 4, 2012 entitled “Reduced Rates for All-Electric Homes in December, January, and February.” He stated that, for the purposes of analysis, focus was placed on years 2002/2003, 2003/2004 and 2004/2005, which represented the last years of the winter/summer rate schedules. Mr. Koenig explained that if the summer rate of 0.0924 were considered the base rate, then the winter < 1,000 KW rate of 0.0880 represented a 4.7619% rate reduction and the winter >1,000 KW rate of 0.0808 represented a 12.5541% rate reduction. Mr. Koenig explained that if these percentage reductions were applied to the usage profile for an electric user who is in the system (Attachment #2 to the memo), this sample customer would receive an estimated savings of $36.60 per month during the months of December, January, and February. This would represent a composite reduction of approximately 9.79% on each monthly bill. He noted that if this past reduction were applied as calculated, the annual impact of the rate adjustment would be approximately $109.80 per typical all-electric household, assuming a 10% rate of reduction, or approximately $220 annualized for a 20% reduction. Mr. Koenig reiterated that the winter/summer rate schedules were abandoned in Fiscal Year 2005/2006 and, from that point forward, all energy costs gravitated toward a blended cost. He noted that the City no longer distinguishes between winter and summer rates in its tariff and residential customers purchase energy only. He noted that there is no demand charge associated with any of the residential customers. Mr. Koenig stated that the most recent rate study did not afford for this type of rate reduction for all-electric homes, so the impact on other customers had not been calculated; however, all revenue lost from a rate reduction must be made up from other residential customers; otherwise, the City’s revenue projections will be compromised. He indicated that if the City were to credit back $15,000 - $18,000 of revenue for all-electric customers, customers who do not have all-electric homes would be penalized. Mr. Koenig stated that he contacted the Delaware Municipal Electric Cooperative (DEMEC) to determine if other utilities in this area provided a reduction program and was advised that they had no knowledge of any such programs at present, although Smyrna had a similar program at one time. Mr. Koenig stated that, based on this information, he recommended against further consideration of the request for reduced rates for all-electric homes. In response to Mr. Hare regarding how such a program would be implemented if approved, Mr. Koenig suggested that a pilot credit program could be considered. He did not feel the City should send staff to individual homes to determine their all-electric status due to potential conflicts and recommended that homeowners obtain an independent verification of their all-electric status by a third party. He indicated that this verification should include notarized correspondence indicating the home had been inspected and the all-electric condition had been verified by a contractor licensed to conduct business within the City of Dover and that a verification form be submitted to the City of Dover by September 30th of each year. Mr. Koenig stated that although the differential between

LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MEETING OF DECEMBER 10, 2012 PAGE 3 winter and summer rates was an approximate 10% composite, he would recommend that a 5% credit be issued at the end of the three (3) month cycle on the bill to simplify the credit adjustment. He recommended that such a program be subject to annual review by staff and Council. Mr. Koenig stated that he did not support implementing such a program as he felt that it would skew the current rate structure and, although all-electric homes were being promoted 40 years ago, the City was no longer in the power production business on a daily basis. He explained that the City has an energy production facility; however, it is essentially a peaking plant in the Pennsylvania, Jersey, Maryland (PJM) Power Pool and runs only when market conditions warrant the facility to run. Mr. Koenig advised members that the City purchases energy from the grid at predetermined hedge prices and the proposed program has the potential to create inequity in the billing structure. He did not believe that additional staff would be needed to administer the program; however, he explained that the program would create additional burdens on current staff. Responding to Mr. Shevock regarding blended costs, Mr. Koenig clarified that this is a financial term associated with power rates. He explained that there were once summer costs and winter costs; however, when the City went to the hedge program and began purchasing blocks of energy, usage was not broken down by season but considered as a whole, thus producing a blended rate. Mr. Koenig noted that there is no compensation for fluctuations in usage because hedge purchasing removes the spikes in the energy profile. Noting that the blended rate eliminates seasonal spikes, Mr. Anderson expressed his concern that customers still experience usage spikes since bills are higher in winter when usage is higher. Mr. Koenig noted that these higher bills are based on usage rather than rate. He explained that the City provided information regarding consumption and hedge purchases made by The Energy Authority (TEA) to Burns & McDonnell for rate analysis and that the City attempts to purchase power in blocks so that the hedge program mirrors consumption. Mr. Anderson questioned the percentage of reduction used to determine the estimated revenue reduction of $15,000-$36,000. Responding, Mr. Koenig stated that based on the original assumption of 200 houses receiving a 10% reduction, the loss of revenue would be approximately $20,000 and a pilot program granting a 5% reduction would result in a $10,000-$11,000 revenue decrease. He noted that he could not be sure of the impact without knowing the exact number of customers involved. If the number of customers was significantly higher (such as 500 homes) the loss figures would change significantly. In response to Mr. Anderson, Mr. Koenig stated that he believed that the program would apply only to owner-occupied, single-family homes, not apartment complexes or rental units. Mr. Bonar noted that he is on a fixed income; however, he does not live in an all-electric home and was concerned that implementing the proposed reduction program would create a burden on the rest of the City’s rate payers. He indicated that costs for all-electric homes are slightly higher than

LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MEETING OF DECEMBER 10, 2012 PAGE 4 others; however, he pays approximately $600 to heat his home using oil, and oil companies are not offering reductions. He empathized with those on fixed incomes but reminded members that the City of Dover has the third lowest electric rates in the State. Mr. Lynn expressed his opinion that the City had a promissory obligation to individuals who were encouraged to renovate or build all-electric homes in the early 1970s based on the promises made by the City of Dover. He indicated that he was sympathetic to those who brought this matter forward and thanked Mr. Koenig for the compromise he presented. Responding to Mr. George regarding whether the City’s budget could support the $14,000 discount for the many seniors who have all-electric homes, Mr. Koenig stated that this question must be answered by Council, noting that it would impact the budget. Councilman Bonar stated that he, Councilman Lynn, and Councilman Anderson have the highest percentage of constituents in their districts that are either elderly or on fixed incomes and have electric homes or have limited means; therefore, he noted that it would be difficult for him not to support the proposal. However, he felt moving forward could result in the rest of the residential rate payers potentially demanding similar discounts, which would “open a Pandora’s Box.” Mr. George noted that the policy had been in place previously to which Mr. Bonar responded that times were different now. Staff recommended against implementing a program of reduced rates for all-electric homes in December, January, and February for the following reasons: 1) Such a program would skew the current rate structure; 2) the City is no longer in the power production business on a daily basis; the energy production facility is essentially a peaking plant in the Pennsylvania, Jersey, Maryland (PJM) Power Pool and runs only when market conditions warrant the facility to run; 3) the City purchases energy from the grid at predetermined hedge prices and the proposed program has the potential to create inequity in the billing structure; 4) Although additional staff would not be needed to administer the program; the program would create additional burdens on current staff. Mr. Koenig stated that, based on this information, he recommended against further consideration of the request for reduced rates for all-electric homes. Mr. Anderson moved to recommend that the matter be referred to the Utility Committee. The motion failed for lack of a second. Mr. Shevock moved to recommend approval of staff’s recommendation against implementing a program of reduced rates for all-electric homes in December, January, and February, seconded by Mr. Rushe. The motion failed by a vote of two (2) yes (Rushe and Shevock) and two (2) no (Anderson and Lynn). Mr. Lynn stated that the matter would be considered by City Council during their Regular Meeting of January 14, 2013 with no recommendation from the Committee.

LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MEETING OF DECEMBER 10, 2012 PAGE 5 Review of City of Dover Identity Theft Prevention Policy Mr. Scott Koenig, City Manager, advised members that the City of Dover Privacy Committee held their annual meeting on November 14, 2012 to review the policy. There were no incidents of identity theft reported by City of Dover customers during the last year; therefore, a recommendation was made to change the frequency of meetings to “... as necessary, if any significant issues of identity theft arise” rather than meeting annually. This change is noted in Part 9 – Administration. No other changes were recommended and the committee approved the Identity Theft Prevention Policy with the above-noted change. Mr. Anderson expressed concern regarding the proposed amendment, noting that identity theft was skyrocketing and that “as necessary could mean never.” Mr. Koenig stated that if any incidents were to arise, the Committee would certainly meet to address them. Mr. Shevock moved to recommend acceptance of the report and that the Identity Theft Prevention Policy be amended to change the frequency of meetings to “as necessary, if any significant issues of identity theft arise,” seconded by Mr. Rushe. The motion carried by a vote of three (3) yes (Lynn, Rushe, and Shevock), one (1) no (Anderson), and one (1) absent (Hare). Mr. Rushe moved for adjournment, seconded by Mr. Shevock and unanimously carried. Meeting adjourned at 6:28 p.m. Sean M. Lynn Chairman SML/TM/dd/mfk/js S:\AGENDAS-MINUTES-PACKETS\Committee-Minutes\2012\12-10-2012 LF&A.wpd

DRAFT Preservation Easement – 12-10-12df Page 1 of 15 For Dover Green, Dover, Delaware Based on template developed by National Trust for Historic Preservation PRESERVATION AND CONSERVATION EASEMENT DEED THIS PRESERVATION AND CONSERVATION EASEMENT DEED, made as of the ____ day of ______, 20__, by and between __________________________ (“Grantor”) with offices at _______________________________________________ and the United States of America, act- ing by and through the Secretary of the Interior and National Park Service (“Grantee”), with offices at 1849 C Street NW (2540), Washington, D.C. 20240. WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, Grantor is owner in fee simple of certain real property known as the Dover Green located in the City of Dover, County of Kent, State of Delaware, more particularly described in Ex- E hibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein (hereinafter “the Property”), said Property not being improved with any buildings. WHEREAS, the Secretary of the Interior is authorized to accept the relinquishment of tracts of land or so much thereof as may be necessary for the proper care and management of objects of his- PL toric or scientific interest in behalf of the Government of the United States under the provisions of section 2 of the Antiquities Act of 1906 (34 Stat. 225, 16 U.S.C. § 431); WHEREAS, because of its historic and cultural significance the Property was included in the ___________________ Historic District in the National Register of Historic Places on December 24, 1967 (insert #); WHEREAS, Grantor and Grantee recognize the historic, and cultural values (hereinafter “con- M servation and preservation values”) and significance of the Property, and have the common purpose of conserving and preserving the aforesaid conservation and preservation values and significance of the Property; WHEREAS, the Property’s conservation and preservation values are documented in a set of re- ports, drawings, and photographs (hereinafter, Baseline Documentation) incorporated herein by ref- SA erence, which Baseline Documentation the parties agree provides an accurate representation of the Property as of the effective date of this grant (in the event of any discrepancy between the two coun- terparts produced, the counterpart retained by Grantee shall control); WHEREAS, the Baseline Documentation shall consist of the following: [list documents and materials] WHEREAS, the grant of a preservation and conservation easement by Grantor to Grantee on the Property will assist in preserving and maintaining the Property and its historic and cultural fea- tures for the benefit of the people of the United States of America; WHEREAS, to that end, Grantor desires to grant to Grantee, and Grantee desires to accept, a preservation and conservation easement (hereinafter, the “Easement”) in gross in perpetuity on the Property. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of Ten Dollars ($10.00) and other good and valuable consideration, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, and pursuant to Section 170(h) of the Code and [give full citation to the state easement legislation], Grantor does hereby voluntarily grant, con-

vey and relinquish unto the Grantee a preservation and conservation easement in gross in perpetuity over the Property described in Exhibit A. PURPOSE 1. Purpose. It is the Purpose of this Easement to assure that the historic, cultural and associated features of the Property will be retained and maintained forever substantially in their current or better condition for conservation and preservation purposes and to prevent any use or change of the Proper- ty that will significantly impair or interfere with the Property’s conservation and preservation values. GRANTOR’S COVENANTS 2.1 Grantor’s Covenants: Covenant to Maintain. (a) Grantor agrees at all times to maintain the Property in the same or better condition and state of repair as that existing on the effective date of this Easement. Grantor’s obligation to maintain shall E require replacement, repair, and/or reconstruction by Grantor whenever necessary to preserve the fea- tures of the property in the same or better condition and state of repair as that existing on the date of this Easement. (b) Grantor’s obligation to maintain shall also require that the Property’s landscaping be main- PL tained in good/better appearance with substantially similar plantings, vegetation, and natural screen- ing to that existing on the effective date of this Easement. The existing lawn areas shall be main- tained as lawns, regularly mowed. (c) Subject to the casualty provisions of Paragraphs 7 and 8, the obligation to maintain shall re- quire replacement, repair, and/or reconstruction whenever necessary in accordance with the standards stated in Paragraph 4. M 2.2 Grantor’s Covenants: Prohibited Activities. The following acts or uses are expressly for- bidden on, over, or under the Property: (a) The Property’s features shall not be demolished, removed, or razed except as provided in Paragraphs 7 and 8. SA (b) Nothing shall be erected or allowed to grow on the Property which would impair the visibil- ity of the Property from the street level or other public rights of way. (c) The Property shall not be divided or subdivided in law or in fact and the Property shall not be devised or conveyed except as a unit. For the purposes of this Easement the term “subdivision” shall include a long term lease or other use of any portion of the Property that creates the characteristics of a subdivision of the property, as determined in the sole discretion of the Grantee. The term “subdivi- sion” shall also include division into condominium or cooperative interests or the partition of undi- vided interests in the property. (d) The dumping of trash, rubbish, ashes, or any other unsightly or offensive materials is prohib- ited on the Property. Page 2 of 15

GRANTOR’S CONDITIONAL RIGHTS SUBJECT TO APPROVAL 3.1 Conditional Rights Requiring Approval by Grantee. The following acts are prohibited except with the prior express written approval of the Grantee, which approval may be withheld or conditioned in the sole discretion of Grantee: (a) Grantor shall not increase or decrease the height of, make additions to, change the exterior construction materials or colors of, or move, improve, alter, reconstruct, or change the facades (in- cluding fenestration) and roofs of the Buildings. (b) Grantor shall not shall not remove, demolish, or alter the following interior features located in the Buildings: [Specific interior features that are to be protected are described here, if applicable] (c) Grantor shall not change the floor plan of the Buildings. E (d) Grantor shall not erect or place on the Property any additional buildings or structures, includ- ing but not limited to, sheds, barns, similar ancillary structures, and non-building structures such as utility transmission lines (subject to utility easements already recorded), satellite receiving dishes, antennas, cellular communications transmitters, or similar electronic frequency receiving or emitting PL devices, flagpoles, fences, walls, wind turbines, solar panels or other similar devices, tents of longer duration than 30 days, mobile homes or trailers, dumpsters, storage containers, camping accommoda- tions, or other similar temporary structures (e) Grantor shall not erect or allow to be erected any external signs or external advertisements except: (i) such plaque permitted under Paragraph 19 of this Easement; (ii) a sign stating solely the name and/or address of the Property and owner; and (iii) a temporary sign to advertise the sale or rental of the Property. M (f) Grantor shall not make substantial topographical changes, such as, by example, excavation for the construction of roads, swimming pools, and recreational facilities. Grantee, at its discretion, may as a condition of granting approval, require Grantor, at Grantor’s cost, to perform an archaeo- logical survey to identify and determine the significance of archaeological deposits. If archaeological deposits are identified, then Grantee may deny or conditional approval of topographical changes as SA appropriate. As applicable, additional archaeological protections may be included, such as that Gran- tor shall take all reasonable precautions to protect archaeological deposits, sites, or features on the Property , and that archaeologically significant deposits, sites, or features on the Property shall not be intentionally disturbed or excavated except by or under the supervision of a professionally qualified archaeologist retained by Grantor, and an archaeological plan approved by the Grantee. (g) Grantor shall not cut down or remove live trees located on the Property unless diseased or damaged as determined in the sole discretion of the Grantee. Grantee may require, at Grantor’s ex- pense, a professional arborist’s report as a condition of reviewing any request to remove live trees. (h) Grantor shall not cut down or remove live trees located in forests for the purpose of conduct- ing commercial timber production [or allow conditional harvesting of timber except in accordance with a qualified forest management plan presented to Grantee for approval. (See Model Conservation Easement)]. (i) Grantor shall not change the use of the Property to another use other than a ____________. Grantee must determine that the proposed use: (i) does not impair the significant conservation and preservation values of the Property; and (ii) does not conflict with the Purpose of the Easement. Page 3 of 15

3.2 Review of Grantor’s Requests for Approval. (a) Pursuant to Paragraph 3.1, Grantor shall submit in writing to Grantee for Grantee’s approval information (including plans, specifications, and designs where appropriate) together with a specific request identifying the proposed activity. In addition, Grantor shall also submit to Grantee a timeta- ble for the proposed activity which is sufficient to permit Grantee to monitor such activity. Grantor shall not make changes or take any action subject to the approval of Grantee unless expressly author- ized in writing by an authorized representative of Grantee. (b) Grantee reserves the right to consult with governmental agencies, nonprofit preservation and conservation organizations, and/or other advisors deemed appropriate by the Grantee, concerning the appropriateness of any activity proposed under this Easement. (c) All approval rights of the Grantee shall be exercised in the reasonable discretion of Grantee. Grantee agrees to use its reasonable efforts to respond to any written request of Grantor not later than forty-five (45) days following receipt by Grantee of Grantor’s request. Failure of Grantee to respond E to Grantor within the forty-five (45) day period shall not, however, be deemed to constitute approval of Grantor’s request. (d) In the event that the Grantor does not implement any approval granted pursuant to Para- PL graphs 3.1 and 3.2, for a period of one (1) year, such approval shall be void. Grantor may resubmit the request for approval; however, such approval may be given or denied in the sole discretion of the Grantee. STANDARDS FOR REVIEW 4. Standards for Review. In exercising any authority created by this Easement to inspect the M Property; to review any construction, alteration, repair, or maintenance; or to review casualty damage or to reconstruct or approve reconstruction following casualty damage, Grantee shall apply the fol- lowing standards (hereinafter “the Secretary’s Standards”), as they may be amended from time to time: For buildings and structures: The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation (36 C.F.R. § 67.7) and the guidelines referenced therein; and, for landscapes: The Secretary of the Inte- rior’s Guidelines for Rehabilitating Cultural Landscapes. SA GRANTOR’S RESERVED RIGHTS 5. Grantor’s Reserved Rights Not Requiring Further Approval by Grantee. Subject to the provisions of Paragraphs 2.1, 2.2, and 3.1, the following rights, uses, and activities of or by Grantor on, over, or under the Property are permitted by this Easement and by Grantee without further ap- proval by Grantee: (a) the right to engage in all those acts and uses that: (i) are permitted by governmental statute or regulation; (ii) do not substantially impair the conservation and preservation values of the Property; and (iii) are not inconsistent with the Purpose of this Easement; (b) pursuant to the provisions of Paragraph 2.1, the right to maintain and repair the Property strictly according to the Secretary’s Standards, subject to the following qualifications: (i) The right to maintain and repair shall mean the use by Grantor of in-kind materials and colors, applied with workmanship comparable to that which was used in the construction or ap- Page 4 of 15

plication of those materials being repaired or maintained, for the purpose of retaining in good condition the appearance and construction of the Property. (ii) The right to maintain and repair shall not include the right to make changes in appear- ance, materials, colors, and workmanship from that existing prior to the maintenance and repair without the prior written approval of Grantee in accordance with the provisions of Paragraphs 3.1 and 3.2. (iii) The right to maintain and repair shall not include the right to replace historic materials unless such historic materials are significantly deteriorated or damaged. (c) the right to continue all manner of existing use and enjoyment of the Property including but not limited to the maintenance, repair, and restoration of existing fences; the right to maintain exist- ing driveways, roads, and paths with the use of same or similar surface materials; the right to main- tain existing utility lines, walkways and steps; the right to cut, remove, and clear grass or other vege- tation and to perform routine maintenance, landscaping, horticultural activities, and upkeep, con- sistent with the Purpose of this Easement. PUBLIC ACCESS E PL 6. Grantor shall make the Property and interior portions of the Courthouse accessible to the pub- lic on a minimum of ___ days per year. This requirement may be fulfilled through an open house, house tour, or similar event that is open to the general public following published notice. Grantor may have a representative present during such public access, and access may be subject to reasonable restrictions to ensure security of the property and safety of the visitors. At other reasonable times, upon request of Grantee made with reasonable notice to Grantor, persons affiliated with educational organizations, professional architectural associations, and historical societies shall be admitted to M study the property. In addition, Grantee may make photographs, drawings, or other representations documenting the significant historical and cultural character and features of the Property and may use or publish them (or authorize others to do so) to fulfill its charitable or educational purposes. Fur- thermore, Grantor agrees that Grantee may, but is not obligated to, provide programs for the public interpreting the conservation and preservation values of the Property subject to advance written ap- SA proval of a program locations and schedule by Grantor. CASUALTY DAMAGE OR DESTRUCTION; INSURANCE 7. Casualty Damage or Destruction. In the event that the Property or any part thereof shall be damaged or destroyed by fire, flood, windstorm, hurricane, earth movement, or other casualty, Gran- tor shall notify Grantee in writing within fourteen (14) days of the damage or destruction, such noti- fication including what, if any, emergency work has already been completed. No repairs or recon- struction of any type, other than temporary emergency work to prevent further damage to the Proper- ty and to protect public safety, shall be undertaken by Grantor without Grantee’s prior written ap- proval. Within thirty (30) days of the date of damage or destruction, if required by Grantee, Grantor at its expense shall submit to the Grantee a written report prepared by a qualified restoration architect and an engineer who are acceptable to Grantor and Grantee; this report shall include the following: (a) an assessment of the nature and extent of the damage; Page 5 of 15

(b) a determination of the feasibility of the restoration of the Property and/or reconstruction of damaged or destroyed portions of the Property; and (c) a report of such restoration/reconstruction work necessary to return the Property to the condi- tion existing at the effective date of this instrument. 8. Review After Casualty Damage or Destruction. If, after reviewing the report provided in Paragraph 7 and assessing the availability of insurance proceeds after satisfaction of any mortga- gee’s/lender’s claims under Paragraph 9, Grantor and Grantee agree that the Purpose of the Easement will be served by such restoration/reconstruction, Grantor and Grantee shall establish a schedule un- der which Grantor shall complete the restoration/reconstruction of the Property in accordance with plans and specifications consented to by the parties up to at least the total of the casualty insurance proceeds available to Grantor. If, after reviewing the report and assessing the availability of insurance proceeds after satisfac- tion of any mortgagee’s/lender’s claims under Paragraph 9, Grantor and Grantee agree that restora- E tion/reconstruction of the Property is impractical or impossible, or agree that the Purpose of the Easement would not be served by such restoration/reconstruction, Grantor may, but only with the prior written consent of Grantee, alter and/or construct new improvements on the Property. Grantor and Grantee may agree to extinguish this Easement in whole or in part in accordance with the laws of PL the State of Delaware and Paragraph 23.2 of this instrument. 9. Insurance. (a) Grantor shall keep the Property insured by an insurance company rated “Secured” by Best’s for the full replacement value against loss from the perils commonly insured under standard fire and extended coverage policies and comprehensive general liability insurance against claims for personal injury, death, and property damage. M (b) Property damage insurance shall include change in condition and building ordinance cover- age, in form and amount sufficient to replace fully the damaged Property without cost or expense to Grantor or contribution or coinsurance from Grantor. Such insurance shall include Grantee’s interest and name Grantee as an additional insured. SA (c) Grantor shall deliver to Grantee a certificate of insurance annually or when coverage is re- newed by Grantor. If Grantor fails to submit proof of insurance coverage annually or at the time of renewal, Grantor must deliver proof of coverage, within ten (10) business days of Grantee’s written request for documentation of coverage. (d) Whenever the Property is encumbered with a mortgage or deed of trust, nothing contained in this paragraph shall jeopardize the prior claim, if any, of the mortgagee/lender to the insurance pro- ceeds. INDEMNIFICATION AND TAXES 10. Indemnification. Grantor hereby agrees to pay, protect, indemnify, hold harmless and de- fend at its own cost and expense, Grantee, its agents, trustees, directors, officers and employees, or independent contractors from and against any and all claims, liabilities, expenses, costs, damages, losses, and expenditures (including reasonable attorneys’ fees and disbursements hereafter incurred) arising out of or in connection with injury to or death of any person; physical damage to the Property; the presence or release in, on, or about the Property, at any time, of any substance now or hereafter Page 6 of 15

defined, listed, or otherwise classified pursuant to any law, ordinance, or regulation as a hazardous, toxic, polluting, or contaminating substance; or other injury or other damage occurring on or about the Property, unless such injury or damage is caused by Grantee or any agent, trustee, director, of- ficer, employee, or independent contractor of Grantee. In the event that Grantor is required to indem- nify Grantee pursuant to the terms of this paragraph, the amount of such indemnity, until discharged, shall constitute a lien on the Property with the same effect and priority as a mechanic’s lien. Provid- ed, however, that nothing contained herein shall jeopardize the priority of any recorded lien of mort- gage or deed of trust given in connection with a promissory note secured by the Property. 11. Taxes. Grantor shall pay immediately, when first due and owing, all general taxes, special taxes, special assessments, water charges, sewer service charges, and other charges which may be- come a lien on the Property unless Grantor timely objects to the amount or validity of the assessment or charge and diligently prosecutes an appeal of the charge, in which case the obligation to pay such charges as defined in this paragraph shall be suspended for the period permitted by law for prosecut- ing such appeal and any applicable grace period following completion of such action. In place of E Grantor, Grantee is hereby authorized, but in no event required or expected, to make or advance upon three (3) days prior written notice to Grantor any payment relating to taxes, assessments, water rates, sewer rentals and other governmental or municipality charge, fine, imposition, or lien asserted against the Property. Grantee may make such payment according to any bill, statement, or estimate PL procured from the appropriate public office without inquiry into the accuracy of such bill, statement, or assessment or into the validity of such tax, assessment, sale, or forfeiture. Such payment if made by Grantee shall constitute a lien on the Property with the same effect and priority as a mechanic’s lien, except that such lien shall not jeopardize the priority of any recorded lien of mortgage or deed of trust given in connection with a promissory note secured by the Property. ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT M 12. Written Notice. Any notice which either Grantor or Grantee may desire or be required to give to the other party shall be in writing and shall be delivered by one of the following methods: by overnight courier postage prepaid, facsimile transmission, registered or certified mail with return re- ceipt requested, or hand delivery; if to Grantor, then at [address], and if to Grantee, then to [address]. SA Each party may change its address set forth herein by a notice to such effect to the other party. 13. Evidence of Compliance. Upon request by Grantor, Grantee shall promptly furnish Grantor with a certification that, to the best of Grantee’s knowledge, Grantor is in compliance with the obli- gations of this Easement, or that otherwise describes the status of this Easement to the extent of Grantee’s knowledge. 14. Inspection. With appropriate prior notice to Grantor, Representatives of Grantee shall be permitted at all reasonable times to inspect the Property. 15. Grantee’s Remedies. Grantee may, following reasonable written notice to Grantor, institute suit(s) to enjoin any violation of the terms of this easement by ex parte, temporary, preliminary, and/or permanent injunction, including prohibitory and/or mandatory injunctive relief, and to require the restoration of the Property to the condition and appearance that existed prior to the violation complained of in the suit. Grantee shall also have available all legal and other equitable remedies to enforce Grantor’s obligations contained in this instrument. Page 7 of 15

In the event Grantor is found to have violated any of its obligations, Grantor shall reimburse Grantee for any costs or expenses incurred in connection with Grantee’s enforcement of the terms of this Easement, including but not limited to all reasonable court costs, and attorney’s, architectural, engineering, and expert witness fees. Exercise by Grantee of one remedy hereunder shall not have the effect of waiving or limiting any other remedy, and the failure to exercise any remedy shall not have the effect of waiving or limiting the use of any other remedy or the use of such remedy at any other time. Grantor agrees that if it does not maintain the Property as covenanted in section 2.1 above, Grantee shall have the right but not the obligation to perform such maintenance activities. 16. Notice from Government Authorities. Grantor shall deliver to Grantee copies of any notice of violation or lien relating to the Property received by Grantor from any government authority with- in five (5) days of receipt by Grantor. Upon request by Grantee, Grantor shall promptly furnish Grantee with evidence of Grantor’s compliance with such notice or lien where compliance is re- quired by law. E 17. Notice of Proposed Sale. Grantor shall promptly notify Grantee in writing of any proposed offer to sell the Property or of any listing of the Property for sale and provide the opportunity for PL Grantee to explain the terms of the Easement to the real estate listing agent and potential new owners prior to sale closing. 18. Liens. Any lien on the Property created pursuant to any paragraph of this Easement may be confirmed by judgment and foreclosed by Grantee in the same manner as a mechanic’s lien, except that no lien created pursuant to this Easement shall jeopardize the priority of any recorded lien of mortgage or deed of trust given in connection with a promissory note secured by the Property. 19. Plaque. Grantor agrees that Grantee may provide and maintain a plaque on the Property, M which plaque shall not exceed 24 by 24 inches in size, giving notice of the significance of the Prop- erty and the existence of this Easement. BINDING EFFECT AND ASSIGNMENT SA 20. Runs with the Land. Except as provided in Paragraphs 8 and 23.2, the obligations imposed by this Easement shall be effective in perpetuity and shall be deemed to run as a binding servitude with the Property. This Easement shall extend to and be binding upon Grantor and Grantee, their re- spective successors in interest and all such persons in the future claiming under or through Grantor and Grantee; the words “Grantor” and “Grantee” when used in this instrument shall include all such persons. Any right, title, or interest granted in this instrument to Grantee also shall be deemed grant- ed to each successor and assign of Grantee and each following successor and assign; the word “Grantee” shall include all such successors and assigns. An owner of the Property shall have no obligation pursuant to this instrument where such owner shall cease to have any ownership interest in the Property by reason of a bona fide transfer. The re- strictions, stipulations, and covenants contained in this Easement shall be inserted by Grantor, verba- tim or by express reference, in any subsequent deed or other legal instrument by which Grantor di- vests itself of either the fee simple title to or any lesser estate in the Property or any part thereof, in- cluding by way of example and not limitation, a lease of all or a portion of the Property. Page 8 of 15

21. Assignment. Grantee may convey, assign, or transfer this Easement to a unit of federal, state, or local government or to a similar local, state, or national organization that is a “qualified or- ganization” under Section 170(h) of the Code whose purpose, among other things, is to promote preservation or conservation of historical, cultural, or architectural resources, provided that any such conveyance, assignment, or transfer requires that the Purpose for which the Easement was granted will continue to be carried out. 22. Recording and Effective Date. Grantee shall do and perform at its own cost all acts neces- sary to the prompt recording of this instrument in the land records of the City of Dover, County of Kent and State of Delaware. Grantor and Grantee intend that the restrictions arising under this Ease- ment take effect on the day and year this instrument is recorded in the land records of the City of Do- ver, County of Kent and State of Delaware. PERCENTAGE INTERESTS AND EXTINGUISHMENT E 23.1 Percentage Interests. For purposes of allocating proceeds pursuant to Paragraphs 23.2 and 23.3, Grantor and Grantee stipulate that as of the date of this Easement, Grantor and Grantee are each vested with real property interests in the Property and that such interests have a stipulated percentage interest in the fair market value of the Property. These percentage interests shall be determined by the PL ratio of the Easement’s value on its effective date to the value of the Property, without deduction for the value of the Easement, on the effective date of this Easement. The values on the effective date of the Easement shall be those values used to calculate the deduction for federal income tax purposes allowable by reason of this grant, pursuant to Section 170(h) of the Code. The parties shall include the ratio of those values with the Baseline Documentation (on file with Grantor and Grantee) and shall amend such values, if necessary, to reflect any final determination by the Internal Revenue Ser- vice or court of competent jurisdiction. For purposes of this paragraph, the ratio of the value of the M Easement to the value of the Property unencumbered by the Easement shall remain constant, and the percentage interests of Grantor and Grantee in the fair market value of the Property thereby determi- nable shall remain constant, except that the value of any improvements made by Grantor after the effective date of this Easement is reserved to Grantor. 23.2 Extinguishment. Grantor and Grantee hereby recognize that circumstances may arise that SA may make the continued ownership or use of the Property in a manner consistent with the Purpose of this Easement impossible and that extinguishment of the Easement may be necessary. Such circum- stances may include, but are not limited to, partial or total destruction of the Property resulting from casualty. Extinguishment must be the result of a judicial proceeding in a court of competent jurisdic- tion. Unless otherwise required by applicable law at the time, in the event of any sale of all or a por- tion of the Property (or any other property received in connection with an exchange or involuntary conversion of the Property) after such termination or extinguishment, and after the satisfaction of prior claims and any costs or expenses associated with such sale, Grantor and Grantee shall share in any net proceeds resulting from such sale in accordance with their respective percentage interests in the fair market value of the Property, as such interests are determined under the provisions of Para- graph 23.1, adjusted, if necessary, to reflect a partial termination or extinguishment of this Easement. All such proceeds received by Grantee shall be used by Grantee in a manner consistent with Grant- ee’s primary purposes. Net proceeds shall also include, without limitation, net insurance proceeds. In the event of extinguishment, the provisions of this paragraph shall survive extinguishment and shall constitute a lien on the Property with the same effect and priority as a mechanic’s lien, except Page 9 of 15

that such lien shall not jeopardize the priority of any recorded lien of mortgage or deed of trust given in connection with a promissory note secured by the Property. In making this grant, Grantor has considered the possibility that uses prohibited by the terms of this Easement may become more economically valuable than permitted uses and that neighboring properties may in the future be put entirely to such prohibited uses. It is the intent of the Grantor and Grantee that any such changes will not be deemed to be circumstances justifying the termination, ex- tinguishment, or modification of this Easement. In addition, the inability of Grantor, or its succes- sors or assigns to conduct or implement any or all of the uses permitted under the terms of this Easement, or the unprofitability of doing so, will not impair the validity of this Easement or be con- sidered grounds for its termination, extinguishment, or modification. 23.3 Condemnation. If all or any part of the property is taken under the power of eminent do- main by public, corporate, or other authority, or otherwise acquired by such authority through a pur- chase in lieu of a taking, Grantor and Grantee shall join in appropriate proceedings at the time of E such taking to recover the full value of those interests in the Property that are subject to the taking and all incidental and direct damages resulting from the taking. After the satisfaction of prior claims and net of expenses reasonably incurred by Grantor and Grantee in connection with such taking, Grantor and Grantee shall be respectively entitled to compensation from the balance of the recovered PL proceeds in conformity with the provisions of Paragraphs 23.1 and 23.2 unless otherwise provided by law. INTERPRETATION 24. Interpretation. The following provisions shall govern the effectiveness, interpretation, and duration of the Easement. (a) Any rule of strict construction designed to limit the breadth of restrictions on alienation or M use of Property shall not apply in the construction or interpretation of this Easement, and this instru- ment shall be interpreted broadly to effect its Purpose and the transfer of rights and the restrictions on use contained in this instrument. (b) This instrument may be executed in two counterparts, one of which may be retained by Gran- SA tor and the other, after recording, to be retained by Grantee. In the event of any disparity between the counterparts produced, the recorded counterpart shall in all cases govern. (c) This instrument is made pursuant to the Act, but the invalidity of such Act or any part thereof shall not affect the validity and enforceability of this Easement according to its terms, it beingIt is the intent of the parties to agree and to bind themselves, their successors, and their assigns in perpetuity to each term of this instrument whether or not this instrument be enforceable by reason of any stat- ute, common law, or private agreement in existence either now or hereafter. The invalidity or unen- forceability of any provision of this instrument shall not affect the validity or enforceability of any other provision of this instrument or any ancillary or supplementary agreement relating to its subject matter. (d) Nothing contained in this instrument shall be interpreted to authorize or permit Grantor to violate any ordinance or regulation relating to building materials, construction methods, or use. In the event of any conflict between any such ordinance or regulation and the terms of this instrument, Grantor promptly shall notify Grantee of such conflict and shall cooperate with Grantee and the ap- Page 10 of 15

plicable governmental entity to accommodate the purposes of both this Easement and such ordinance or regulation. (e) To the extent that Grantor owns or is entitled to development rights which may exist now or hereafter under any applicable zoning or similar ordinance, that would permit the Property to be de- veloped to a use or uses more intensive (in terms of height, bulk, number of structures, assemblage of lots, subdivision, or other criteria related by such ordinances) than that to which the Property is devoted as of the date of this Easement, such development rights shall not be exercisable on, above, or below the Property during the term of the Easement, nor shall they be transferred to any adjacent or other parcel. (f) To the extent that any action taken by Grantee pursuant to this Easement gives rise to a claim of breach of contract, Grantor and Grantee agree that the sole remedy on the part of Grantor shall be reimbursement of actual direct out-of-pocket expenses reasonably incurred by Grantor as a result of such breach and that Grantor shall not have any right to indirect, consequential, or monetary damages E in excess of such actual, direct, and reasonable out-of-pocket expenses. (g) While it is the mutual intention of Grantor and Grantee that the grant of this Easement shall constitute a qualified conservation contribution under federal and/or state law, Grantor is solely re- sponsible for ensuring that the terms of the Easement and the circumstances of the grant meet the PL qualifications necessary for Grantor to obtain federal or state benefits applicable to qualified conser- vation contributions. Grantee makes no representation that the grant of this Easement entitles Gran- tor to any tax or other benefit under federal, state, or local law, and Grantor’s failure to qualify for any such benefit relating to the grant of this Easement shall not constitute grounds for the rescission, termination, extinguishment, or amendment of this Easement, or for any claim of damages. AMENDMENT M 25. Amendment. If circumstances arise under which an amendment to or modification of this Easement would be appropriate, Grantor and Grantee may by mutual written agreement jointly amend this Easement, provided that no amendment shall be made that will adversely affect the quali- fication of this Easement or the status of Grantee under any applicable laws, including Sections SA 170(h) and 501(c)(3) of the Code and the laws of the State of _________. Any such amendment shall be consistent with the protection of the conservation and preservation values of the Property and the Purpose of this Easement; shall not affect its perpetual duration; shall not permit additional residen- tial [and/or commercial] development on the Property other than the residential [and/or commercial] development permitted by this Easement on its effective date; shall not permit any private inurement to any person or entity; and shall not adversely impact the overall historic and cultural values pro- tected by this Easement. Any such amendment shall be recorded in the land records of the City of Dover, County of Kent and State of Delaware. Nothing in this paragraph shall require Grantor or Grantee to agree to any amendment or to consult or negotiate regarding any amendment. PUBLIC LAW 109-280 “SPECIAL RULES” COMPLIANCE [as applicable] 26. Protection of Entire PropertyBuilding. Grantor and Grantee agree that that the restrictions of this Easement shall apply to the entire Propertyexterior of the Buildings (including the front, sides, rear, and height of the Buildings) and interior architectural features, as applicable, and that no change to the exterior of the Buildings may be made by Grantor except as provided herein. Page 11 of 15

27. Inconsistent Changes Prohibited. Grantor and Grantee agree that Grantor shall not under- take, and Grantee shall not permit, any change to the Property which would be inconsistent with the historical character of Property. 28. Certification of Qualification of Grantee Under Penalty of Perjury. [As applicable.] By execution of this Easement, Grantor and Grantee agree, and hereby certify under penalty of perjury, that Grantee is a qualified easement-holding organization (as defined in Section 170(h)(3) of the In- ternal Revenue Code) with a purpose of environmental protection, open space preservation, or histor- ic preservation, and that the Grantee has both the resources to manage and enforce the restrictions of this Easement and a commitment to do so. GIFT ACKNOWLEDGMENT [as applicable for donated easements] E 29. Gift Acknowledgment. Grantor hereby acknowledges the gift of the real property interest described in this Easement, and further acknowledges that no goods or services were provided to Grantor in exchange for the donation of the Easement or any accompanying cash contribution by Grantee. PL THIS EASEMENT reflects the entire agreement of Grantor and Grantee. Any prior or simulta- neous correspondence, understandings, agreements, and representations are null and void upon exe- cution of this agreement, unless set out in this instrument. Grantor acknowledges that this Easement affects important legal rights and obligations of Grantor, including the rights and obligations of Grantor’s successors and assigns, and that Grantor has had the opportunity to consult with knowl- edgeable legal counsel of Grantor’s own choosing prior to execution of the Easement. M GRANTOR, for itself, its successors and assigns, does hereby covenant with the Grantee and its assigns that Grantor is lawfully seized and possessed of the herein described Property in fee simple; that the same is free and clear of all encumbrances (except for covenants, easements, and restrictions of record, if any); that Grantor has the right to convey this Easement; that Grantor warrants, specially SA and generally, the title and quiet enjoyment of the Property; that Grantor, its successors and assigns will forever defend the same unto Grantor and its assigns against all lawful claims and demands thereof by others and will issue such further assurances as Grantor and/or its assigns may request, GRANTEE, notwithstanding any provision to the contrary herein, shall not be required to expend in any one fiscal year any sum in excess of appropriations made by Congress or adminis- tratively allocated for the purpose of compliance with the conditions of this Easement for the fis- cal year; this Easement shall not bind Grantee under any contract or other obligation for the fur- ther expenditure of money in excess of such appropriations or allocations; and nothing in this Easemnet may be considered as implying that Congress will at a later date appropriate funds suf- ficient to meet deficiencies. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD, the said Preservation and Conservation Easement, unto the said Grantee and its successors and permitted assigns forever. This DEED OF PRESERVATION AND CONSERVATION EASEMENT may be executed in two counterparts and by each party on a sepa- Page 12 of 15

rate counterpart, each of which when so executed and delivered shall be an original, but both of which together shall constitute one instrument. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Grantor and Grantee have set their hands under seal on the days and year set forth below. [As applicable: Grantor and Grantee expressly acknowledge and understand that, by their exe- cution of this document, the certification under Paragraph 28 is made under penalty of perjury.] WITNESS: GRANTOR: ________________________________ ________________________________ ________________________________ ________________________________ ATTEST: E GRANTEE: (date) PL ________________________________ By:_____________________________ ________________________________ By:_____________________________ [Notarizations to follow] (date) M SA Page 13 of 15

MORTGAGE SUBORDINATION [as applicable] 30. Subordination of Mortgage. At the time of the conveyance of this Easement, the Property is subject to a Mortgage/Deed of Trust dated ________, recorded in the Land Records of [county, town, or district] at Book/Liber ______, Page/Folio ______ (hereinafter “the Mortgage”/”the Deed of Trust”) held by ________________________ (hereinafter, “Mortgagee”/”Lender”). The Mortga- gee/Lender joins in the execution of this Easement to evidence its agreement to subordinate the Mortgage/the Deed of Trust to this Easement under the following conditions and stipulations: (a) The Mortgagee/Lender and its assignees shall have a prior claim to all insurance proceeds as a result of any casualty, hazard, or accident occurring to or about the Property and all proceeds of condemnation proceedings, and shall be entitled to the same in preference to Grantee until the Mort- gage/the Deed of Trust is paid off and discharged, notwithstanding that the Mortgage/the Deed of Trust is subordinate in priority to the Easement; provided, however, that if the Easement is terminat- E ed under the circumstances described in Paragraphs 23.2 and 23.3, Grantee shall be entitled to com- pensation in accordance with the terms set forth therein. (b) If the Mortgagee/Lender receives an assignment of the leases, rents, and profits of the Prop- erty as security or additional security for the loan secured by the Mortgage/Deed of Trust, then the PL Mortgagee/Lender shall have a prior claim to the leases, rents, and profits of the Property and shall be entitled to receive the same in preference to Grantee until the Mortgagee’s/Lender’s debt is paid off or otherwise satisfied, notwithstanding that the Mortgage/Deed of Trust is subordinate in priority to the Easement. (c) The Mortgagee/Lender or purchaser in foreclosure shall have no obligation, debt, or liability under the Easement until the Mortgagee/Lender or a purchaser in foreclosure under it obtains owner- ship of the Property. In the event of foreclosure or deed in lieu of foreclosure, the Easement is not extinguished. M (d) Nothing contained in this paragraph or in this Easement shall be construed to give any Mort- gagee/Lender the right to violate the terms of this Easement or to extinguish this Easement by taking title to the Property by foreclosure or otherwise. SA [Signatures] Page 14 of 15

SCHEDULE OF EXHIBITS A.Property Description B. Baseline Documentation [generally non-recordable] E PL M SA Page 15 of 15

CITY OF DOVER FINANCE & CENTRAL SERVICES DEPARTMENTS MONTHLY BUDGET REPORT NOVEMBER 2012 PREPARED BY: FINANCE DEPARTMENT PLEASE NOTE – THIS REPORT PROVIDES TOP LINE INFORMATION ON THE OPERATING FUNDS. IF YOU WOULD LIKE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, PLEASE FEEL FREE TO CONTACT THE FINANCE DEPARTMENT.

2 of 10 CITY OF DOVER November 2012 Monthly Budget Reports S FINANCE DEPARTMENT ACTIVITY LEVELS FY12 YTD FY13 YTD BANK TRENDS Number of Deposits Made 2,031 2,375 Total Amount of All Deposits $ 70,034,962 $ 67,606,437 PAYROLL Hours % Amount Hours % Amount Gross wages per registers 380,943 100.0% $ 8,925,870 370,550 100.0% $ 8,923,657 Wages and Hours Worked Regular 322,411 84.6% $ 6,996,030 303,914 82.0% $ 6,744,373 All over time 14,290 3.8% $ 666,736 20,362 5.5% $ 906,899 Other Paid or Unpaid Wages and Hours Vacation 24,330 6.4% $ 633,895 21,958 5.9% $ 572,604 Sick 10,536 2.8% $ 274,280 8,518 2.3% $ 213,751 Terminal Leave - Retiree Vacation/Sick Payout 4,015 1.1% $ 162,428 10,579 2.9% $ 298,469 Comp Time 3,996 1.0% $ 120,026 4,042 1.1% $ 114,264 Personal 333 0.1% $ 9,107 425 0.1% $ 11,629 Leave Without Pay - 0.0% $ - - 0.0% $ - Other (description below) 1,032 0.3% $ 63,368 755 0.2% $ 61,668 Other includes: pay adjustments, military differential pay, committee meetings, worker compensation tracking/adjustments, etc. Other Activity Number of Pay Periods 11 11 Number of Payroll Checks & Direct Deposits Issued 4,276 4,012 Number of Pension Checks Issued 1,195 1,229 Total Pension Benefits Paid - Defined Benefit Plan $ 1,932,659 $ 2,034,375 Payroll Checks & Direct Deposits issued: number of payroll checks issued for FY 2010 includes separate checks for shoe allowance & clothing allowance. ACCOUNTS PAYABLE Number of Check Vouchers 2,643 2,541 Number of EFT Vouchers 919 892 Vouchers Dollar Amount Disbursed $ 36,868,351 $ 36,123,867 CENTRAL SERVICES ACTIVITY LEVELS Warehouse Stock Total Amount of Items on Hand $3,000,000 2,700 $630 2,600 2,500 $2,500,000 2,400 2,300 2,200 $2,000,000 $530 2,100 2,000 $1,500,000 1,900 1,800 1,700 $1,000,000 1,600 $430 1,500 1,400 Thousands $500,000 1,300 Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov $330 11 11 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 Total Dollar Value Total Line Items Total Dollar Value: $2,284,405 $230 Total Line Items: 1,476 $130 S t o c k P u r c h a se s b y F u n d $250,000 $200,000 $30 Nov‐11 Dec‐11 Jan‐12 Feb‐12 Mar‐12 Apr‐12 May‐12 Jun‐12 Jul‐12 Aug‐12 Sep‐12 Oct‐12 Nov‐12 $ 15 0 , 0 0 0 $ 10 0 , 0 0 0 Electric Water General $50,000 $0 N ov D e c J a n Fe b M a r A pr M a y J un J ul A ug S e p Oc t N ov Electric: $523,419 Water: $59,228 General: $41,083 11 11 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 E le c t ric Wa t e r G e ne ra l Fuel Use Electric: $27,294 Water: $2,035 General: $16,124 Unleaded: 8,925.5 gallons Diesel: 6,939.8 gallons Total: $ 49,750

3 of 10 City of Dover Finance Department Monthly Report –November 2012 General Fund Summary 42% of Budget YTD Balance Budget Beginning Balance - unaudited $ 2,666,600 $ - $ 2,666,600 0.0% Revenues Court of Chancery Fees 753,800 202,700 551,100 26.9% Fines & Police Revenues 1,162,400 515,148 647,252 44.3% Franchise Fees 550,000 156,444 393,556 28.4% Grants 708,500 139,975 568,525 19.8% Intrafund Services 4,329,100 1,714,122 2,614,978 39.6% Library & Recreation Revenues 602,100 261,052 341,048 43.4% Licenses & Permits 2,508,300 1,697,413 810,887 67.7% Property Taxes (Includes BID Revenue) (1) 11,049,000 11,033,775 15,225 99.9% Sanitation Revenues 2,690,200 1,095,178 1,595,022 40.7% Other Miscellaneous Revenues 130,500 68,385 62,115 52.4% Garrison Farm Rent Revenue 62,000 14,094 47,906 22.7% Transfers-In from Special Funds & Utilities Civil Traffic Penalties 750,000 67,020 682,980 8.9% Municipal Street Aid Fund 527,400 265,434 261,966 50.3% Transfer Taxes 1,370,000 219,775 1,150,225 16.0% Verizon and CI Reserves 11,000 - 11,000 0.0% Water/Wastewater Fund 500,000 500,000 - 100.0% Electric Fund 8,000,000 4,000,000 4,000,000 50.0% Total Revenues 35,704,300 21,950,515 13,753,785 61.5% Total Beginning Balance & Revenues $ 38,370,900 $ 21,950,515 $ 16,420,385 57.2% Expenditures City Clerk & Council $ 441,100 $ 167,768 $ 273,332 38.0% Mayor, City Manager & Human Resources 822,100 328,661 493,439 40.0% Police & Police Extra Duty 13,774,600 5,939,314 7,835,286 43.1% Public Services 4,359,300 1,684,380 2,674,920 38.6% Central Services 1,968,400 761,354 1,207,046 38.7% Planning & Inspections 1,996,600 796,983 1,199,617 39.9% Finance, Info Tech & Customer Services 2,423,400 999,513 1,423,887 41.2% Library & Recreation 1,963,600 730,008 1,233,592 37.2% Fire Department 688,300 294,795 393,505 42.8% Assessor 187,500 81,539 105,961 43.5% Contribution to DDP 180,000 180,000 - 100.0% Miscellaneous Grant Expense 25,000 - 25,000 0.0% Other Employment Expenses 463,400 - 463,400 0.0% Insurance 600,000 172,722 427,278 28.8% OPEB - Retiree’s Health Care Contribution 1,620,600 810,300 810,300 50.0% Police Pension Trust Contribution - State Grant 500,000 100,000 400,000 20.0% Appropriation to Emp Pension Fund - Unfunded Liability 1,310,500 1,310,500 - 100.0% Appropriation to Police Pension Fund 95,000 95,000 - 100.0% Street Lights 869,700 370,256 499,444 42.6% Debt Service 624,200 314,403 309,797 50.4% Provision for Uncollectible 10,000 10,000 - 100.0% Transfers Out Capital Projects Fund 613,400 - 613,400 0.0% Total Expenditures 35,536,700 15,147,496 20,389,204 42.6% Budget Balance - Working Capital 2,834,200 - 2,834,200 0.0% Total Budget Balance & Expenditures $ 38,370,900 $ 15,147,496 $ 23,223,404 39.5% Reserve Balances Contingency $ 731,100 $ 727,017 (1) Property Taxes are the taxes billed and not cash received. The outstanding receivable balance as of 11/30/12 is $656,740.69 as compared to $941,414.20 in November 2011.

4 of 10 Finance Department Monthly Report –November 2012 Water/Wastewater Fund Summary 42% of Budget YTD Balance Budget Beginning Balance - Water - unaudited $ 865,100 $ - $ 865,100 0.0% Beginning Balance - Wastewater - unaudited $ 853,000 $ - $ 853,000 0.0% Beginning Balance - Kent County Treatment - unaudited $ (553,500) $ - $ (553,500) 0.0% 1,164,600 - 1,164,600 0.0% Revenues Water Fees 4,730,700 2,167,062 2,563,638 45.8% Wastewater Fees 3,834,600 1,605,998 2,228,602 41.9% Kent County Treatment Fees 3,090,800 1,324,098 1,766,702 42.8% Ground Water Adjustment Fees 1,257,600 594,256 663,344 47.3% Water Tank Leases 313,500 139,030 174,470 44.3% Interest Earnings - Water 8,700 994 7,706 11.4% Interest Earnings - Water/Wastewater 17,100 1,931 15,169 11.3% Miscellaneous 77,000 36,602 40,398 47.5% Impact Fees - Water 350,000 124,789 225,211 35.7% Impact Fees - Wastewater 317,000 119,036 197,964 37.6% Total Revenues 13,997,000 6,113,796 7,883,204 43.7% Total Beginning Balance & Revenues $ 15,161,600 $ 6,113,796 $ 9,047,804 40.3% Expenses Water/Wastewater Operating Divisions Engineering & Inspection $ 597,900 $ 188,305 $ 409,595 31.5% Water 408,200 157,405 250,795 38.6% Water Treatment Plant 1,522,600 602,969 919,631 39.6% Wastewater 993,000 300,509 692,491 30.3% Construction & Inspection 345,700 141,535 204,165 40.9% Kent County Treatment Fees 3,600,000 1,423,701 2,176,299 39.5% Intrafund Services 1,235,400 471,128 764,272 38.1% Pension Unfunded Liability 309,800 309,800 - 100.0% OPEB - Retiree's Health Care Contributions 220,000 110,000 110,000 50.0% Debt Service 1,263,600 322,600 941,000 25.5% Inventory/Fixed Asset Write-offs 5,000 5,000 - 100.0% Other Employment Expenses 16,200 - 16,200 0.0% Transfers Out 0.0% General Fund 500,000 500,000 - 100.0% Uncollectible Reserve 5,000 5,000 - 100.0% Water I & E Fund 1,700,000 425,000 1,275,000 25.0% Wastewater I & E Fund 1,200,000 300,000 900,000 25.0% Capital Asset Reserve - Water 70,000 70,000 - 100.0% Capital Asset Reserve - Wastewater 22,000 22,000 - 100.0% Total Expenses 14,014,400 5,354,952 8,659,448 38.2% Budget Balances Budget Balance - Working Capital - Water 482,700 - 482,700 0.0% Budget Balance - Working Capital - WW 664,500 - 664,500 0.0% Total Budget Balances 1,147,200 - 1,147,200 0.0% Total Budget Balances & Expenses $ 15,161,600 $ 5,354,952 $ 9,806,648 35.3% Reserve Balances Contingency-Water $ 103,724 $ 103,110 Contingency-Wastewater $ 189,176 $ 186,481 Impact Fee Reserve - Sewer NO BUDGET $ 3,507,091 Impact Fee Reserve - Water NO BUDGET $ 442,359 Bond Coverage Ratio (Covenant 1.20) 3.73 4.65

5 of 10 Finance Department Monthly Report –November 2012 Electric Revenue Fund Summary 42% of Budget YTD Balance Budget Beginning Balance - unaudited $ 7,184,000 $ - $ 7,184,000 0.0% Revenues Sales to Customers 85,071,400 38,765,779 46,305,621 45.6% Utility Tax 1,595,200 645,880 949,320 40.5% Weyandt Hall Rents 225,000 92,039 132,961 40.9% Miscellaneous Revenues 979,700 527,594 452,106 53.9% Interest Earned 107,800 42,710 65,090 39.6% Transfer from Rate Stabilization 5,400,000 2,700,000 2,700,000 50.0% Intrafund Service Receipts Water/Wastewater 130,800 57,863 72,937 44.2% Total Revenues 93,509,900 42,831,865 50,678,035 45.8% Total Beginning Balance & Revenues $ 100,693,900 $ 42,831,865 $ 57,862,035 42.5% Expenses Power Supply & Generation Power Supply $ 40,883,400 $ 16,755,459 $ 24,127,941 41.0% Power Supply Management/Incentive 996,000 415,000 581,000 41.7% Capacity Charges 12,564,800 4,690,302 7,874,498 37.3% PJM Spot Market Energy (772,700) - (772,700) 0.0% PJM Charges - Load 17,508,300 5,929,034 11,579,266 33.9% Total Power Supply 71,179,800 27,789,795 (27,789,795) 39.0% Plant Operations 5,914,900 2,370,912 3,543,988 40.1% Generation Fuels 586,000 944,038 (358,038) 161.1% Capacity Credits (14,318,600) (5,952,083) (8,366,517) 41.6% PJM Credits (427,000) (2,103,371) 1,676,371 492.6% Total Generation (8,244,700) (4,740,504) 4,740,504 57.5% Total Power Supply & Plant 62,935,100 23,049,291 39,885,809 36.6% Electric Operating Divisions: Transmission/Distribution 3,223,600 1,398,446 1,825,154 43.4% Electrical Engineering 1,163,900 439,495 724,405 37.8% Administration 501,200 130,076 371,124 26.0% Meter Reading 212,500 92,946 119,554 43.7% Systems Operations 517,600 230,842 286,758 44.6% Intrafund Services 3,224,500 1,300,857 1,923,643 40.3% Utility Tax 1,595,200 645,881 949,319 40.5% OPEB - Retirees Health Care Contribution 696,500 348,250 348,250 50.0% Pension Trust Contribution - Unfunded liability 1,074,200 1,074,200 - 100.0% Interest on Deposits 35,000 11,392 23,608 32.5% Green Energy Payment to DEMEC 129,000 63,233 65,767 49.0% Accounts Receivable Write-Offs 150,000 150,000 - 100.0% Inventory Write-Offs 175,000 175,000 - 100.0% Other Employee Expenses 157,900 - 157,900 0.0% Contractual Services Power Supply 190,000 19,775 170,225 10.4% Debt Service 3,323,600 1,406,985 1,916,615 42.3% Transfers Out: 0.0% General Fund 8,000,000 4,000,000 4,000,000 50.0% Electric Improvement & Extension Fund 3,500,000 1,750,000 1,750,000 50.0% Total Expenses 90,804,800 36,286,669 54,518,131 40.0% Budget Balance - Working Capital 9,889,100 - 9,889,100 0.0% Total Budget Balance & Expenses $ 100,693,900 $ 36,286,669 $ 64,407,231 36.0% Reserve Balances Contingency Reserve $ 816,200 $ 806,508 Insurance Reserve $ 750,000 $ 726,085 Rate Stabilization Reserve $ 4,947,600 $ 7,611,005 Bond Coverage Ratio (Covenant 1.25) 2.74 7.02 Megawatt Hours Sold & Purchased Sales to Customers MWh (excluding Street Light MWh) 709,972 335,601 47.3% Sales per MWh $ 119.824 $ 115.512 96.4% Purchased/Generated MWh 750,296 328,953 43.8% All In MWh Supply & Generation 83.88 $ 70.069 83.5%

6 of 10 Finance Department Monthly Report –November 2012 General Capital Project Fund Summary 42% of Budget YTD Balance Budget Beginning Balance - Projects - unaudited $ 294,400 $ - $ 294,400 0.0% Revenues State Grant - Other 108,000 93,210 14,790 86.3% Interest Earnings - 5,784 (5,784) 0.0% Income from Sale of Assets - 39,193 (39,193) 0.0% Loan Proceeds - Streets, City Hall 2,000,000 - 2,000,000 0.0% Loan Proceeds - Garrison Farm 2,000,000 - 2,000,000 0.0% Transfer from General Fund for Projects 613,400 - 613,400 0.0% Police Grant 33,800 - 33,800 0.0% Subtotal Project Receipts 4,755,200 138,187 4,617,013 State Grant - Library 884,200 724,812 159,388 82.0% Loan Proceeds - Library Green Energy Project - 648,500 (648,500) 0.0% Kent County Library Contribution 250,000 250,000 - 100.0% Transfer from Library Foundation 67,500 300,000 (232,500) 444.4% Income from Sale of Library/Bridge Loan 1,200,000 1,200,000 - 100.0% Subtotal Library Project Receipts 2,401,700 3,123,312 (721,612) 130.0% 0.0% Total Revenues 7,156,900 3,261,499 3,895,401 45.6% Total Beginning Balance & Revenue $ 7,451,300 $ 3,261,499 $ 4,189,801 43.8% Expenditures Fire $ 238,500 $ 238,515 $ (15) 100.0% Grounds Maintenance 112,000 - 112,000 0.0% Library 2,535,000 2,412,078 122,922 95.2% Recreation 30,000 - 30,000 0.0% Police 197,000 19,864 177,136 10.1% Streets (1) 1,974,000 16,756 1,957,244 0.8% Sanitation 150,000 - 150,000 0.0% Information Technology 57,000 50,198 6,802 88.1% Facilities Management 381,000 96,275 284,725 25.3% Mayor 33,000 - 33,000 0.0% Loan Issuance Costs 56,000 1,029 54,971 1.8% Transfer to Community Transportation Fund 1,606,700 - 1,606,700 0.0% Total Expenditures 7,370,200 2,834,715 4,535,485 38.5% Budget Balance - Projects 81,100 - 81,100 0.0% Total Budget Balance & Expenditures $ 7,451,300 $ 2,834,715 $ 4,616,585 38.0% Reserve Balances Capital Asset Replacement Reserve $ 503,000 $ 502,493 Parkland/Recreation $ 202,600 $ 200,900 (1) Street program - Budget includes $2 million for street repaving and City Hall improvements to be completed over two years (Fiscal Years 2012 and 2013). Will be funded by bond issue or commercial bank loan.

7 of 10 City of Dover Finance Department Monthly Report –November 2012 Water/Wastewater Improvement & Extension Fund Summary 42% of Budget YTD Balance Budget Beginning Balance - Water - unaudited $ 3,071,800 $ - $ 3,071,800 0.0% Beginning Balance - Wastewater - unaudited $ 1,013,600 $ - $ 1,013,600 0.0% Revenues Bond Proceeds - Water 2,000,000 - 2,000,000 0.0% Bond Proceeds - Wastewater 2,000,000 - 2,000,000 0.0% State Loan-Wastewater 2011 - 297,239 (297,239) 0.0% Income from Sale of Assets - 4,171 (4,171) 0.0% Interest Earned 25,000 40,808 (15,808) 163.2% Transfer from Water Operating Fund for Water 1,700,000 425,000 1,275,000 25.0% Transfer from Wastewater Operating Fund for Wastewater 1,200,000 300,000 900,000 25.0% Transfer from Impact Fee Reserve - Water 300,000 - 300,000 0.0% Transfer from Impact Fee Reserve - Wastewater 250,000 - 250,000 0.0% Total Revenues 7,475,000 1,067,218 6,407,782 14.3% Total Beginning Balance & Revenues $ 11,560,400 $ 1,067,218 $ 10,493,182 9.2% Expenses Bond Issue Costs $ 344,000 $ - $ 344,000 0.0% Engineering & Inspection 23,400 - 23,400 0.0% Water 5,140,000 332,540 4,807,460 6.5% Wastewater 3,817,300 684,873 3,132,427 17.9% Water Treatment Plant 24,100 - 24,100 0.0% Water Construction 31,000 - 31,000 0.0% Total Expenses 9,379,800 1,017,413 8,362,387 10.8% Budget Balance - Working Capital - Water 1,675,500 - 1,675,500 0.0% Budget Balance - Working Capital - Wastewater 505,100 - 505,100 0.0% Total Budget Balances 2,180,600 - 2,180,600 0.0% Total Budget Balances & Expenses $ 11,560,400 $ 1,017,413 $ 10,542,987 8.8% Reserve Balances Capital Asset Replacement - Water $ 501,100 $ 500,643 Capital Asset Replacement - Wastewater $ 501,100 $ 499,498

8 of 10 Finance Department Monthly Report –November 2012 Electric Improvement & Extension Fund Summary 42% of Budget YTD Balance Budget Beginning Balance - unaudited $ 2,714,600 $ - $ 2,714,600 0.0% Revenues Interest Earnings 40,700 18,311 22,389 45.0% Transfer from Electric Revenue Fund 3,500,000 1,750,000 1,750,000 50.0% Transfer from Future Capacity Reserve 550,000 550,000 - 100.0% Total Revenues 4,090,700 2,323,237 1,767,463 56.8% Total Beginning Balance & Revenues $ 6,805,300 $ 2,323,237 $ 4,482,063 34.1% Expenses Power Plant $ 1,441,300 $ 68,861 $ 1,372,439 4.8% Transmission/Distribution 596,000 442,542 153,458 74.3% Electrical Engineering 1,932,700 408,892 1,523,808 21.2% Total Expenses 3,970,000 920,295 3,049,705 23.2% Budget Balance - Working Capital 2,835,300 - 2,835,300 0.0% Total Budget Balance & Expenses $ 6,805,300 $ 920,295 $ 5,885,005 13.5% Reserve Balances Depreciation Reserve $ 9,864,800 $ 9,762,152 Future Capacity Reserve $ 9,362,000 $ 9,279,386

9 of 10 City of Dover Finance Department Monthly Report –November 2012 Community Transportation Improvement Fund 42% of Budget YTD Balance Budget Beginning Balance - unaudited $ 435,700 $ - $ 435,700 0.0% Revenues Grants Revenue 300,000 4,192 295,808 1.4% Transfer from General Capital Project Fund 1,606,700 - 1,606,700 0.0% Interest Earned 500 - 500 0.0% Total Revenues 1,907,200 4,192 1,903,008 0.2% Total Beginning Balance & Revenues $ 2,342,900 $ 4,192 $ 2,338,708 0.2% Expenses Program Expenses $ 700,000 $ 13,193 $ 686,807 1.9% Program Expenses - City appropriated 1,546,700 - 1,546,700 0.0% Program Expenses- Concrete Program 60,000 6,148 53,852 10.2% Total Expenses 2,306,700 19,341 2,287,359 0.8% Budget Balance - Working Capital 36,200 - 36,200 0.0% Total Budget Balances & Expenses $ 2,342,900 $ 19,341 $ 2,323,559 0.8%

10 of 10 CITY OF DOVER SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS COMBINING STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN UNRESERVED FUND PERIOD ENDED NOVEMBER 30, 2012 CDBG/NSP SUBSTANCE POLICE LIBRARY HOUSING ABUSE PREV. GRANTS GRANTS GRANTS GRANT TOTALS REVENUES: State Grants received $ 182,725 $ - $ - $ 14,015 $ 196,740 Federal Grants received 17,292 1,275 190,573 - 209,140 Recreation revenue - - - 3,330 3,330 Investment income (loss) - - - - - TOTAL REVENUES $ 200,017 $ 1,275 $ 190,573 $ 17,345 $ 409,210 EXPENDITURES: Program expenditures $ 111,944 $ 42,147 $ - $ 37,381 $ 191,472 Program expenditures - NSP - - 58,002 - 58,002 Program expenditures - CDBG - - 49,628 - 49,628 TOTAL EXPENDITURES $ 111,944 $ 42,147 $ 107,630 $ 37,381 $ 299,102 Excess (deficiency) of revenues over expenditures $ 88,073 $ (40,872) $ 82,943 $ (20,036) $ 110,108 Other financing sources (uses): Operating transfers-out (82,676) - - - (82,676) Excess (deficiency) of revenues and other financing sources over expenditures & other uses $ 5,397 $ (40,872) $ 82,943 $ (20,036) $ 27,432 FUND BALANCE AT BEGINNING OF YEAR $ 173,789 $ 30,008 $ 16,197 $ 21,620 $ 241,614 FUND BALANCE AT END OF PERIOD $ 179,186 $ (10,864) $ 99,140 $ 1,584 $ 269,046

Monthly Report November 2012 Office of City Assessor

Assessor’s Report Number of Deeds Stamped for the Transfer Tax Dollar Amount for the Month of November 2011/2012 Month of November 2011/2012 34 $100 35 $60 Thousands 30 25 25 15 16 $30 20 $50 $28 15 10 $6 $12 $7 $0 5 2011 $0 2011 10 1 0 1 0 5 $0 0 2012 2012 First Time Buyer for Month of November 2011/2012 Realty November 2011/2012 PropertySales in Dollars Received Prior to Recording 20 15 16 Res. Non‐First $3 $2 $2 $2 Millions 15 Time Buyers $2 10 $1 $0 $0 10 Res. First Time 2011 $1 $0 $0 5 $0 Buyers 5 2012 0 2011 2012 Major Updates September ‐ 12 October ‐ 12 November – 12 Assessment Change $4,405,200 ‐$449,700 $1,056,900 Residential Sales Ratio Report Sales in Study Total Assessed Value Total Sale Pric e Ratio PRD 9 $1,983,100 $1,866,180 1.06 1.01 Ratio – Assessed Value divided by Sale Price. PRD – Mean – A PRD above 1.03 tends to indicate assessment regressivity – high valued properties are under appraised relative to low valued properties. A PRD below .98 tends to indicate assessment progressivity – high valued properties are relatively over appraised. 1

Assessor’s Report Points of Interest Scanning & Filing ‐ All new deeds are being scanned and attached to the CAMA software for easy retrieval. ‐ All appeal documents and correspondence are being scanned and attached to the CAMA software for easy retrieval. ‐All old property record cards are scanned and indexed into Fortis. 2015 Revaluation ‐ The Assessor’s Office has started the 2015 Revaluation process. 2

DEC 18, 2012 CITY OF DOVER PAGE: 1 08:58 AM SALES RATIO REPORT CA324 PARID NBHD LUC ADDRESS UNITS STYLE YRBLT STORIES SFLA GRADE CDU TOTAL APPR SALE DT PRICE ASR ED05-066.02-01-01.00 24A R10 101 HOBBYHORSE CT 5 2011 2 2614 B+ VG 275,900 05-NOV-12 255,000 1.08 ED05-067.17-02-56.00 22 R10 172 BURNING TREE RD 1 5 1988 2 3010 B+ VG 313,400 16-NOV-12 275,000 1.14 ED05-076.04-01-82.00 16M R10 514 ANN MOORE ST 13 2012 2 1760 B- AV 173,100 02-NOV-12 181,085 .96 ED05-076.04-01-83.00 16M R10 516 ANN MOORE ST 13 2012 2 1760 B- AV 173,100 02-NOV-12 174,595 .99 ED05-076.05-07-19.00 22 R10 311 PEBBLE VALLEY PL 1 5 1997 2 2901 A- VG 311,300 02-NOV-12 285,000 1.09 ED05-076.07-02-27.00 17 R10 8 PAUL REVERE CT 1 5 1989 2 2333 B GD 207,700 27-NOV-12 233,500 .89 ED05-077.11-05-32.00 16J R10 12 MER WAY 8 2012 2 2242 B- AV 202,200 09-NOV-12 182,000 1.11 ED05-085.12-02-71.00 12 R10 364 MOCKINGBIRD AVE 1 5 1968 2 1688 C+ AV 163,700 09-NOV-12 125,000 1.31 ED05-085.12-03-67.00 12 R10 382 MIMOSA AVE 1 16 1972 1 1844 C+ AV 162,700 19-NOV-12 155,000 1.05

CITY MANAGER’S MONTHLY REPORT NOVEMBER 2012 City Manager’s Monthly Report, November 2012

Customer Services  In the month of November, we processed 1,669 payments as of November 30, 2012.  City of Dover property taxes were due July 31, 2012. As of November 30, 2012, the delinquent property taxes total $659,509.56 for all tax years. Our collection efforts include sending a delinquent statement, making phone calls, and enforcing the Clean Hands Act. The Planning and Inspections Department has been providing assistance in collecting these outstanding debts. In December, the properties over one (1) year delinquent will be selected to be processed for the monition sale. Human Resources  Continued contract negotiations with DOE bargaining unit  Open enrollment for flex spending Library  1,194 children attended 43 children’s programs.  66 teens attended 10 programs for teens.  275 adults attended 8 adult programs.  128 attended 26 programs/classes coordinated through the Job Center. Public Works  Working on CIP and additional funding for future street program and other projects. 2 City Manager’s Monthly Report, November 2012

CUSTOMER SERVICES WORK ORDERS PROCESSED EXTENSIONS OF CREDIT 3,000 1,000 2,500 2,349 800 1,920 2,000 1,783 1,836 1,583 1,658 1,658 1,730 1,655 1,652 1,576 1,576 1,447 600 1,500 1,000 400 303 297 248 231 251 223 207 500 200 Nov‐ Dec‐ Jan‐ Feb‐ Mar‐ Apr‐ May‐ Jun‐ Jul‐ Aug‐ Sep‐ Oct‐ Nov‐ Nov‐ Dec‐ Jan‐ Feb‐ Mar‐ Apr‐ May‐ Jun‐ Jul‐ Aug‐ Sep‐ Oct‐ Nov‐ 11 11 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 11 11 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 CUSTOMER PAYMENT USAGE CUTS FOR NON PAYMENT 80,000 $2,000,000 64,359 61,948 60,000 $1,600,000 $1,200,000 $1,109,690 40,000 28,231 26,159 11,675 $800,000 $574,474 20,000 12,504 9,497 9,513 57 49 $400,000 $199,581 0 $103,334 Drive‐Thru Over the Mail, Drop Credit Cards Bank Drafts Window Counter Box $‐ November 2012 November 2011 FYTD13 FYTD12 2013 YTD 2012YTD FY 2013 FY 2012 Major Program Updates Nov 2012 Nov 2011 Difference Year‐to‐Date Year‐to‐Date Number of Customers Served 23,621 21,653 1,968 123,527 123,348 Final Bills 599 600 (1) 3,385 3,443 Es mated Bills 175 152 23 763 780 Penal es Posted $ 22,611 $ 22,505 107 $ 102,744 $ 96,136 Extensions of Credit ‐ Amount Extended $ 104,120 $ 107,949 (3,829) $ 460,796 $ 1,125,097 Balance Transfers $ 3,579 $ 1,755 1,824 $ 13,450 $ 9,068 U lity Collec ons $ 18,167 $ 20,460 (2,293) $ 119,802 $ 159,326 Special Assessments $ 110 $ ‐ 110 $ 549 $ 110 Miscellaneous Billings $ 166,902 $ 118,285 48,617 $ 556,412 $ 711,598 CNP through Disconnect Collars $ 32 $ 9 23 154 44 Court Cases ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ Tamperings 2 4 (2) 14 22 Taxes Levied (includes carry forward) $ 10,901,726 $ 1,024,315 9,877,411 $ 10,901,726 $ 1,024,315 Billing Adjustments $ 10,837 $ 116 10,720 $ 10,837 $ 116 Total Taxes Collected $ 10,253,053 $ 71,663 10,181,390 $ ‐ $ 9,966,666 Taxes Outstanding $ 659,510 $ 952,768 (293,259) $ 659,510 $ 952,768 Payments in Lieu $ 5,000 $ ‐ 5,000 $ 5,000 $ ‐ Billing Accuracy (on schedule billings) 99.0% 99.0% ‐ 99.0% 99.0% Bills Published on Schedule 99.0% 99.0% ‐ 99.9% 99.9% Meters Read on Schedule 99.9% 99.9% ‐ 99.9% 99.9% Customer Sa sfac on Ra ng 99.9% 99.9% ‐ 99.7% 99.7% Delinquent Accounts Collected 99.7% 99.7% ‐ 99.8% 99.8% City Manager’s Monthly Report, November 2012 3

HUMAN RESOURCES Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Category Total 11 11 12 12 12 12 12 12 2012** 2012 12 12 12 Caucasian* 299 299 295 294* 291 289 290 285 286 282 286 285 283 N/A * Minori es 61 59 59 59* 57 56 57 58 59 58 58 58 57 N/A Hired 1 0 0 2 0 0 2 6 0 1 5 0 1 18 Terminated/Resigned/ 2 2 4 3 5 3 2 5 0 5 1 0 4 36 Re red/Other Transferred/Promoted 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 2 2 8 Jobs Posted 0 0 0 0 3 4 2 2 0 4 1 2 4 22 Workers Comp. Injuries 9 4 3 3 6 2 2 1 4 2 2 5 0 43 Workers Comp. Hours 369 418 315 222 55 195 112 139 164 192 160 66 138 2545 Insurance Claims 1 2 1 2 4 3 6 2 3 1 3 3 4 35 Full‐ me Employees: 324 Part‐ me Employees: 16 (4 Pi s Center, 1 Recrea on, 11 Library) ‐Numbers do not reflect, temporary, seasonal, relief fire dispatchers, commi ee or council members. * Correc on to February 2012; **Correc on to July 2012 Posi on Posted: Motor Equipment Operator I & II (Sanita on), Library Clerk II & Library Assistant Posi on Re red: Records Unit Supervisor (Police), Library Assistant Posi on Terminated: Inspector I Posi on Resigned: Custodian I Posi on Promoted: MEO I to MEO II (Water) Posi on Transferred: MEO I (Streets) to MEO I Water/Wastewater Hired: Police Clerk II Recruitment Informa on (Job pos ng closed in November) American Indi‐ Asian/Pacific In Out Posi on Total Female Male Black White Hispanic an/Alaskan Unknown Islander Dover Dover Na ve MEO I & II 65 0 65 26 35 0 1 0 3 20 45 Library Clerk II 119 93 11 29 71 2 2 0 15 43 76 Library Assistant 85 63 17 32 43 3 1 1 5 39 46 Unfilled/Open Posi ons by Department* Unfilled/Open Posi ons Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov By Department 11 11 12** 12 12 12 12 12 12² 12 12 12 12 Electric 5 5 5 5 5 5 3 3 1 2 2 3 3 Public Works 5 5 9 11 13 13 15 16 9 12 13 12 12 Police 3 3 3 1 2 3 2 4 3 4 5 5 5 All Other Departments 10.5 12.5 11.5 12 13 15 14 15 8 9 6 6 7 Totals 23.5 25.5 28.5 29 33 36 34 38 21 27 26 26 27 ² The following has been updated to reflected the Fiscal 2012‐13 Budget Electric: Electric Director, Electrical Engineer, Senior Lineman Public Works: (2) U lity Maintenance Mechanic I/ Wastewater, (2) Motor Equipment Operator I/Water, Motor Equipment Operator II/Water, (2) Motor Equipment Operator II/Sanita on, Vehicle Maintenance ‐Mechanic I, Water Treatment Plant Operator I, U lity Maintenance Mechanic II/Wastewater, Opera ons ‐Construc on Manager, Buildings Cra sperson II, Custodian Police: Police Officer, Communica ons Operator, Administra ve Assistant, Building Cra sperson I, Records Unit Supervisor All Other Departments: Administra ve Assistant ‐ IT, Library Clerk I, (2) Library Assistant, (2) Fire Dispatcher, Inspector I 4 City Manager’s Monthly Report, November 2012

HUMAN RESOURCES continued Bonus Programs by Month Bonus Program Cate‐ Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Total gory 11 11 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 Stop Program‐Sensibly Taking Off Pounds(weigh 148 ‐ins) Caught Doing it Right‐ Promotes employees 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 6 produc vity & crea vity (submissions) Breathe Program‐ Rewards for ending 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 tobacco use (submissions) Ducs in a Row‐Doing Useful Community Ser‐ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 vice (submissions) Workers Comp Injuries 20 15 10 5 0 * Nov‐ Dec‐ Jan‐ Feb‐ Mar‐ Apr‐ May‐ Jun‐ Jul‐12 Aug‐ Sep‐ Oct‐ Nov‐ 11 11 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 Electric Public Works Police Others * Organiza on Change Electric: 0 Public Works: 0 Police: 0 All Other Depts.: 0 * * Organiza on Change Electric: 0 Public Works: 98 Police: 040 All Other Depts.: 0 City Manager’s Monthly Report, November 2012 5

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY Service Requests Resolved Citizen Action Center ‐ Customers w/ New Issues 250 221 206 150 202 198 186 192 100 200 171 182 179 130 165 162 94 144 144 110 63 82 150 100 90 31 61 44 48 100 70 60 86 86 57 50 50 30 0 10 Nov‐ Dec‐ Jan‐ Feb‐ Mar‐ Apr‐ May‐ Jun‐ Jul‐ Aug‐ Sep‐ Oct‐ Nov‐ Nov‐ Dec‐ Jan‐ Feb‐ Mar‐ Apr‐ May‐ Jun‐ Jul‐ Aug‐ Sep‐ Oct‐ Nov‐ 11 11 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 11 11 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 Programming Requests Completed Page Views ‐ City of Dover Web Page 30 28 30,000 24 23 25 21 21 25,000 20 Pages Viewed 17 20,000 15 16 16 15 15 14 27,002 15 12 15,000 20,942 22,051 22,828 22,905 23,096 19,853 19,936 20,685 18,886 17,995 17,120 17,542 10 10,000 5 5,000 0 0 Nov‐ Dec‐ Jan‐ Feb‐ Mar‐ Apr‐ May‐ Jun‐ Jul‐ Aug‐ Sep‐ Oct‐ Nov‐ Nov- Dec- Jan- Feb- Mar- Apr- May- Jun- Jul- Aug- Sep- Oct- Nov- 11 11 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 11 11 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 Current Performance Indicators Last Month Same Month Month Last Year iSeries Availability 100% 100% 100% Server Availability 100% 100% 100% AS/400 Connec ons (concurrent/authorized users) N/A N/A N/A PCs Supported 356 358 341 Scheduled PCs Replaced ‐ ‐ ‐ Servers Supported 14 14 16 People Trained 8 2 21 Availability Sta s cs based on 7:00 AM un l 5:00 PM Monday—Friday 6 City Manager’s Monthly Report, November 2012

LIBRARY Adult Services Childrens Services 1000 1000 500 500 0 0 Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov 11 11 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 11 11 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 Reference Reader's Advisory Reference Reader's Advisory Electronic Assistance Reference – 227; Reader’s Advisory – 150; Reference - 186; Reader’s Advisory – 68; Electronic Assistance – 890 Electronic Assistance – 54 ****We have amended our Electronic Assistance, Reader's Advisory & Reference transactions to more accurately represent the actual statistics.*** Circulation Nov 12 FYTD 13 Nov 11 FYTD 12 Dover residents 22,481 87,119 16,138 83,878 Ebooks (began 12/2011) 837 4,031 Kent residents* 16,222 67,963 14,326 73,251 Non-county residents 2,306 9,699 2,028 8,602 Registrations Dover residents 478 1,833 140 1,007 Kent residents* 110 460 52 418 Non-county residents 10 50 4 50 Other Visiting Patrons 30,024 131,380 27,195 156,776 Meeting Room Usage 1,396 3,003 120 300 Photocopier Usage 1,123 5,273 906 6,795 Dial-A-Story N/A 1,911 852 5,306 Holds (Total) 5,713 26,433 6,572 35,842 *Breakout of Kent County Residen al Sta s cs Circula on Registra ons Harrington: 182 Harrington: 1 Smyrna: 1,427 Smyrna: 15 Milford: 137 Milford: 2 Outside City Limits: 14,476 Outside City Limits: 92 Total Registered Users: (Card Holders) City: 19,413 Kent County: 13,040 Outside Kent County: 1,084 Other Points of Interest: Inter/Interlibrary***: 60 items loaned out Technical services: 1,230 items added 42 items borrowed 2,604 items deleted Volunteers: 308 hours of service completed City Manager’s Monthly Report, November 2012 7

PUBLIC WORKS Administration Administra ve review and inspec on services con nued on all residen al and commercial developments. The following residen al subdivisions are in various phases of construc on: Oak Shadows Emerald Pointe Lexington Glenn Village of Westover (Phase VI) Farthing Woods Eden Hill (Residen al) Patriot Village Clearview Meadows Village of Cannon Mill Sanitation Monthly Total Refuse (Tons) Sanitation Hours 1,500 940 928 1000 1,000 887 826 826 864 862 804 762 769 790 788 710 525 508 412 426 500 500 282 285 157 144 162 148 143 155 150 131 141 108 118 131 99 26 32 ‐ 0 Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Bulk Collection Mechanized Hand Trash Container 11 11 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 Collection Collection Repair/Delivery Bulk Automated Nov 12 Nov 11 NOVEMBER 12 FYTD 13 NOVEMBER 11 FYTD 12 Trips to DSWA Sandtown Landfill 170 861 170 917 Total Tonnage to DSWA 993.62 4,862.46 1,044.27 5,356.41 90‐Gallon Containers Delivered 27 147 7 99 300‐Gallon Containers Delivered 1 14 3 14 Total Man Hours‐containers Delivered 26 233 32 35 CURBSIDE RECYCLING TOTAL # OF TOTAL # OF STATS HOUSEHOLDS ACCOUNTS WEIGHT/LBS. AVE. LBS. COLLECTED November 2012 19,306 8,669 295,380 15.30 8 City Manager’s Monthly Report, November 2012

Streets NOVEMBER 12 FYTD 13 NOVEMBER 11 FYTD 12 Signed Installed 32 150 15 79 Signs Repaired 6 59 14 91 Curbs Painted Yellow (feet) 0 5,510 30 942 New Post Installed 5 29 3 39 Storm Catch Basins Repaired 0 1 0 26 Storm Catch Basin Repairing (Hrs.) 0 1 0 10 Storm Catch Basins Cleaned 0 361 0 165 Storm Catch Basins Cleaning (Hrs.) 0 202 0 217 Hot Mix Patching (Tons) 0 236 0 63 Hot Mix Patching (Hrs.) 0 283 0 420 Cold Mix Patching Hrs.) 46 243 32 213 Concrete Work (Hrs) 0 435 0 544 Concrete Patching (Cubic Yards) 0 4 0 1 Street and Alley Maintenance (Hrs) 168 864 152 848 Ditch Work (Hrs). 0 102 0 64 Street Sweeping (Miles) 0 4,092 0 4,195 Street Sweeping (Cubic Yards) 0 1,030 0 962 Leaves Collected (Cubic Yards) 8,075 9,375 7,575 8,112 Leaf Collec on (Miles) 2,106 3,464 1,833 2,594 Grounds Arborist Crew NOVEMBER 2012 NOVEMBER 2011 Trees Trimmed 28 21 Trees Removed 6 1 Stumps Removed 2 0  Removed dead branches and part of light stands in large Zelkova on Loockerman Way behind the Santa House.  Limbed up and adjusted light in Holly trees on Loockerman Street. Beau fica on Crew  Con nued to ll, rake and plant spring flowering bulbs in the annual/perennial beds.  Hung holiday wreaths on window/doors at City Hall, Weyandt Hall and the Library. Put candles in the windows at City Hall.  Put together the hor culture order for po ng, media, pots, and fer lizer. Mowing Crew  Mowing slowing down except for mowing areas around City buildings and on The Plaza and The Green.  Assisted with plan ng bulbs.  Grounds personnel began assis ng the streets division with leaf collec on. City Manager’s Monthly Report, November 2012 9

Geographic Information Systems (GIS)  Printed mul ple posters and maps for Economic Development.  Provided stormwater files to consultant.  Created alternate soil sampling map.  Created a radar speed sign map.  Coded voters for elec on.  Created hand trash tonnage graphs.  Created a proposed mowing contract map.  Created posters for the library. Fleet and Facilities Management Fleet Maintenance Work Orders: 50 Major Program Updates Measure NOVEMBER 2012 NOVEMBER 2011 DIFFERENCE * 6 out of 21 28.5 % 3 Unscheduled PM’s Scheduled Preventative Maintenance appoint- 27 out of 30 17 Vehicles No-Show - 61.43 % ments being kept (Quantity and Percentage) 90.00 % or No room in shop for PM Short staff-Vacation/ Sick Facilities Management Routine work orders completed within 5 days 22 out of 24 30 out of 30 - 8.33% (Quantity and Percentage) 91.67% 100% Emergency work orders completed within 2 4 out of 4 6 out of 6 0% days (Quantity and Percentage) 100 % 100 % 10 City Manager’s Monthly Report, November 2012

Water/Wastewater Water Production/Billed Consumption/Flow to Kent County 255,000,000 205,000,000 155,000,000 105,000,000 55,000,000 5,000,000 Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov 11 11 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 Total Water Prod. Billed Consumpt. ENGINEERING SUMMARY Major Program Updates NOVEMBER 12 NOVEMBER 11 DIFF FY13 YTD FY12 State and Federal Viola ons 0 viola ons 0 viola ons ‐ ‐ ‐ Water Quality Complaints 0 3 ‐3 37 60 Plan Review Completed Within 30 days 3 plan 17 plan 33 ‐14 38 of Submission 100% 100% Field Inspec on Response within 48 27 12 +15 160 127 hours of Request OPERATIONAL SUMMARY Task NOVEMBER 12 NOVEMBER 11 CURRENT FY Water Produc on ‐ Daily Average 3,814,267 4,007.300 722,020,000 Average Field Response Time (goal is <30 minutes) 17.78 15.50 17.90 Water Mains Repaired 5 2 21 Water Service Lines Repaired 1 0 23 Wastewater Mains Repaired 0 1 3 Wastewater Service Lines Repaired 1 0 3 Sewer Lines Flushed ‐ linear feet 64,251 41,662 376,455 Sewer Mains Videoed ‐linear feet 0 0 16,727 Total Fire Hydrants in Service 1,801 1,779 1,801 Total Water Meters in City Distribu on System 14,081 13,989 14,081 City Manager’s Monthly Report, November 2012 11

PUBLIC UTILITIES Electric System Peak Total System Load 200 100,000 171.1 81,930 158.5 153.4 77,547 143.7 66,593 140 80,000 150 60,425 60,085 62,510 118.4 57,142 55,238 54,951 55,553 56,336 55,973 106.13 109.3 102.9 60,000 53,525 98.5 97.3 99.6 94.5 100 40,000 50 20,000 Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov 11 11 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 11 11 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 Outages Customers of Gained/Lost 35 6,000 100 88 5,000 25 80 Customers 4,000 Outages 60 54 15 3,000 2,000 40 5 26 1,000 20 10 13 6 9 6 5 ‐5 Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov 0 2 2 2 2 11 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 0 Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Outages: 6 Outages Customers: 231 Customers 11 11 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 Electric Monthly Outage Report The annual outage goal will be less than 295 Controllable Outages Average Response Time minutes per customer, which is a Delaware Annual goal is less than 40 Goal is less than 30 minutes Standard. This will be measured by calcula ng the System Average Interrup on Dura on Index. Month Year‐to‐date Month Year‐to‐date FY 13 YTD FY 12 FY 11 4 17 21.4 Minutes 27.50 Minutes 49.74 45.84 63.78 NOV 12 NOV 11 FY13 YTD PROGRAM UPDATES Tree Trimming 284 76 1333 Number of Oil Releases 0 1 1 Lost Time Accidents – All Electric U lity Divisions 1 2 2 New Services 26 6 172 Major Goals Completed in the Past Two Months N/A 12 City Manager’s Monthly Report, November 2012

CITY PLANNER’S MONTHLY REPORT 15 Loockerman Plaza P.O. Box 475 Dover, DE 19903 Phone: (302) 736-7196 Fax (302) 736-4217 November 2012 PERSONNEL On November 7, 2012 Ann Marie Townshend attended Webinar Training – “Delegation: How to Train Managers to Get Results through Other People” at City Hall. On November 13, 2012 Ann Marie Townshend, Dawn Melson-Williams, Janelle Cornwell, Tracey Harvey, and Planning Commissioner Fred Tolbert attended the “Complete Communities Summit” held at Dover Downs Hotel & Conference Center. On November 14, 2012 Ann Marie Townshend and Dawn Melson-Williams attended a Capital Trail Workshop held at the Dover Public Library. On November 17, 2012 Dawn Melson-Williams attended a Historic District Commission Training by Preservation Delaware held at the Biggs Museum. PLANNING OFFICE The Planning Office is part of the review process for certain types of construction activity permits (Building Permits, Sign Permits, etc.) and Certificate of Occupancy permits. Planning Staff also reviews new applications for Business Licenses and Rental Dwelling Permits. More detailed information on these permits and licenses is reported later in this document. For November 2012, Planning Staff was involved with review of 54 Permits and 18 Certificates of Occupancy permits (2012 Year to Date total of 859 Permits and COs compared to 838 year-to-date in 2011). EDEN HILL FARM TND • Phase 1: Residential District of Eden Hill Farm TND – 77 dwelling units constructed. Infrastructure for Phase 1 is not yet dedicated. • Phase 2: Residential District of Eden Hill Farm TND – No additional units are under construction at this time. • Prior to continuing with additional development in Phase 2, the site developer/property owner needs to address infrastructure dedication, bonding, street lighting payments for installation, tree planting requirements, and other infrastructure items. • There was no activity associated with the Professional Office, Medical & Financial District. • There was no activity associated with the Neighborhood Commercial District. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IMPLEMENTATION Planning Staff continues to focus on the various implementation items identified in the 2008 Comprehensive Plan as amended. Staff is preparing a text amendment and Zoning Map amendment to update the Airport Environs Overlay Zone (AEOZ) as a result of the recent AICUZ Study for Dover Air Force Base. A workshop

for affected property owners was held on November 8, 2012 by the Planning Office. The formal review process for the amendments will begin in January 2013. Other on-going efforts include participating in planning for the Capital City Trail, participating in the planning and development design of Garrison Oak Technical Park and research for future ordinance amendments related to housing and the commercial zoning classifications. NEW DOVER HIGH SCHOOL PROJECT (C-10-05/S-11-18) Construction activities related to site improvements and the building construction activities continue at the site. The applicant continues to work on the design for the east entrance. The construction continues on the signalized west entrance (Dover High Drive) and Route 8 improvements. NPDES – MUNICIPAL SEPARATE STORM SEWER SYSTEM PERMIT No new activities to report for the month of November. BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS REPORTS BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: The Board of Adjustment met on November 14, 2012 (held one week early due to Thanksgiving Holiday) and took the actions summarized below. The next regular scheduled meeting of the Board of Adjustment is scheduled for December 19, 2012, but is canceled due to there being no applications to consider. Applicant #V-12-14 – 1275 South State Street, Bayhealth Medical Center Inc. – Approved the variance pertaining to setback of a monument sign. Applicant #V-12-12: - 800 North State Street, S&R, LLC - Approved parking variance pertaining to the size of parking spaces and a reduction in the overall number of parking spaces. HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION: The Historic District Commission did not meet on November 15, 2012 due to lack of quorum. The next Historic District Commission meeting is scheduled for December 13, 2012. PLANNING COMMISSION The Planning Commission met on November 19, 2012 and took the actions summarized listed below. The next Planning Commission meeting is scheduled for December 17, 2012. 1. C-12-06 Dover First Christian School at 647 Wyoming Avenue – Conditional Use Site Plan application was conditionally approved with the Architectural Review Oversight Sub-Committee’s new plans on architecture to allow for the construction of a 4,000 SF school building and associated site improvements. Approval also included that a tree buffer be placed between the school and New Burton Road along the north property line; approval of waiver of requests eliminating sidewalks along New Burton Road and Konschak Avenue, elimination of upright curbing, and a reduction in parking; and compliance with the DAC Comments of record. 2. SB-12-02 Lands of First National Bank of Wyoming at 219 Beiser Boulevard - Minor Subdivision Plan application was conditionally approved to create two (2) parcels of land from the existing 3.78 acre ± parcel. The parcel will be subdivided into a 1.39 acre ± parcel and a 2.39 acre ± parcel and to include all DAC Comments of record. 3. US-12-01 Dover Mall at 1365 North DuPont Highway: Comprehensive Signage Plan – Comprehensive Signage Plan application received conditional approval to permit the construction and implementation of signage for the Dover Mall consisting of a pylon sign, wall signs for the anchor

tenants, and directional signage. Approval requires compliance with all of the DAC Comments of record. 4. US-12-02 Redevelopment of Former Wal-Mart Site at 1574 North DuPont Highway: Comprehensive Signage Plan – Comprehensive Signage Plan application received conditional approval to permit the construction and implementation of signage for the proposed redevelopment of the former Wal-Mart building consisting of two pylon signs and wall signs for the future tenants. Approval requires compliance with all Staff and DAC Comments of record. CODE ENFORCEMENT Case Type # cases current # cases % staff initiated % staff initiated month YTD current month YTD No valid rental permit 7 133 86% 96% No valid building permit 4 47 75% 87% Tall grass and weeds 11 578 100% 68% Unregistered vehicle 1 25 100% 72% Abandoned vehicle 4 119 100% 67% Annual Housing Inspection 21 534 95% 77% Property Maintenance – 50 482 68% 57% Exterior Electric Termination 22 299 100% 98% Dover Code of Ordinances 100 379 86% 71% Zoning 1 71 100% 52% Total Cases 221 2668 Total # of Inspections 299 DANGEROUS BUILDINGS/DEMOLITION STATUS The following buildings were declared dangerous by City Council: • 123 Blue Beach Drive – Monthly inspections continue, property is improving, and pool is in compliance. • 488 North East Avenue – The exterior overgrowth of weeds and grass has been removed by the bank. No interior repairs have been made. On November 13, 2012, Council ordered the owner to repair or demolish the structure within 30 days or the City would proceed with the demolition of the structure. • 39 Primrose Drive – No repairs have been made. The asbestos survey was conducted on November 15th with no asbestos located. Bids are being prepared for the demolition of the home. • 126 N. Ann Avenue – Property is in the process of being sold. The new owner has gutted the interior and removed all overgrowth from the exterior, no permits have been obtained. • 212 N. Governors Avenue – Council declared this structure dangerous and ordered the owners to make repairs by October 24, 2012 or the City would begin the demolition process within 10 days of that date. The asbestos survey and abatement was completed on the 29th of November. Bids are being prepared for the demolition of the structure. • 209 N New Street – Council approved Staff’s recommendation for demolition at the council meeting on October 8, 2012 and ordered the owner to repair or demolish the home and garage within 10 days of that date. Since that date, the Mortgage Company has requested time to make exterior repairs to avoid the demolition. No inspections occurred in October but the home has been secured & boarded. Pictures were taking of the exterior of the home and sent to the mortgage company. • 628 N West Street – Staff declared this building as dangerous in October and was scheduled for Council review on November 13, 2012. Council agreed with the home-owner and granted a 90 day extension to

make repairs to the home. Since that date, the homeowners have cleaned the trash and debris from the interior of the home and have ordered an electrical inspection of the property and meter so that they can obtain a new meter. • 312/314 W Division St – Staff declared this duplex as dangerous in October and was scheduled for Council review on November 13, 2012. Council granted the homeowner a 90 day extension to make repairs to the home or have it demolished by February 13, 2013. • 316 & 320 W Division St – Staff declared these homes as dangerous buildings in October and were scheduled for Council review on November 13, 2012. Council gave the homeowner 30 days to make repairs or have the properties demolished. Since that date, the homeowner has paid all outstanding fees owed to the City and has begun work to bring the properties into compliance. During the month of November staff registered an additional 28 structures as vacant buildings; total number of active vacant buildings within the City is 333. Staff also collected in November $1,000.00 in new registration fees for a total of $24,500 for 2012. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT U CDBG FY12 PROJECTS Homeownership Assistance Program CDBG funds will be used to provide down payment and closing cost to first time homebuyers who purchase properties in the City. MHDC Homeowner Rehabilitation Program CDBG funds will be used to rehabilitate owner occupied homes in the City of Dover found in violation of the City’s housing code. Dover Interfaith Mission to the Homeless CDBG funds will be used for operations cost for the shelter. MHDC Emergency Home Repair Project CDBG funds will be used to assist very low income homeowners with emergency home repairs to eliminate severe housing conditions that constitute health and safety hazards. NCALL Research CDBG funds will be used for foreclosure prevention and pre-purchase homeownership counseling services to Dover residents. Serenity Place CDBG funds will be used for the reconstruction of a treatment facility for persons who suffer from substance abuse that was destroyed in a fire. Elizabeth W. Murphey School CDBG funds will be used to install a geothermal heating system in one of the facilities that services children that are at risk for homelessness. Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP) The City was awarded $1,426,740 for the acquisition and rehab of foreclosed properties to be sold to qualifying families. A total of $1,311,895 has been expended on the acquisition and renovations for 10 properties. The remaining balance of $114,845 will be utilized for renovations and acquisition. Seven properties have been sold, one under contract, one is a lease purchase and one is a rental that serves persons with disabilities.

218 Ann Avenue (sold) 337 N. Governors Avenue (sold) 343 Mimosa Avenue (sold) 254 Green Blade Drive (sold) 907 Woodcrest Avenue (sold) 302 Stonebrook Place (Lease Purchase) 1430 S. Hancock (group home rental) 11 Westover Drive (sold) 1415 S. Hancock (Under Contract) 110 Thames Drive (sold) FIRE MARSHAL’S OFFICE BUILDING INSPECTIONS AND LICENSING LIFE SAFETY Inspections NOV 12 FYTD 13 Nov 11 FYTD 12 Fire Protection Inspections (new & existing) 36 171 55 336 Fire Code Inspections 164 894 32 275 Inspection Deficiencies 37 196 22 363 Certificate of Occupancy 10 24 1 14 Office 120.5 449.5 60 478 Meetings 21 121 20 182 Plan Review 171 410.5 35 183 Training 0 0 64 70 Fire Investigations 8 16 6 53 Accidental $3000.00 $450.00 $50.00 $125,010.00 Incendiary $3000.00 $11,100.00 $2,000.00 $59,500.00 Undetermined $21,000.00 $1,150.00 $10,400.00 $20,000.00 PERMITTING AND LICENSING Permits Issued NOV 12 FYTD 13 NOV 11 FYTD 12 Administrative Permit 1 13 3 11 Building Addition/Renovation Permits 42 213 25 156 Building Permits 11 71 12 81 Demolition Permits 1 22 1 6 Fence Permits 3 39 4 46 Fire Prevention Permits 9 33 9 30 Mechanical Permits 31 167 25 118 Plumbing Permits 29 148 41 180 Sign Permits 26 102 37 118 Swimming Pool Permits 0 10 0 6 Business Licenses 36 910 51 1,304 Merchant Licenses 4 243 10 262 Contractor Licenses 37 579 29 674 Lodging House Licenses 0 1 5 5 Mobile Homes 4 161 16 273 Public Occupancy 2 30 1 43 Rental Dwelling 0 97 6 94 BUILDING INSPECTIONS NOV 12 FYTD 13 NOV 11 FYTD 12 Building 334 1,292 276 1,505 Plumbing/Mechanical 440 1,329 341 1,776

Certificate of Occupancy 18 46 12 52 PARKS and RECREATION Parks and Recreation Recreation Revenue 30,000 25,669 17,726 25,000 15,552 13,726 20,000 15,000 7,890 7,548 7,776 7,427 7,783 7,828 7,269 10,000 6,132 3,242 5,000 0 No v De c Ja n Fe b Ma r Apr Ma y Ju ne Ju ly Aug Sep t Oc t No v 11 11 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 Year To Date Revenue Comparison General – $2,023 Rental Payments – $0 FY12 $33,507 vs FY13: $58,854 Sports – $1,875 Leagues – $20,530 Trips – $1,248 Rentals NOVEMBER11 NOVEMBER12 FYTD 13 FYTD 12 Baseball/Softball Field Rentals* 0 41 0 98 Dover Park Pavilions (2) 0 27 9 48 Multipurpose/Field Hockey Field Rentals* 0 11 0 22 Recreation Center – Dover Park n/a 39 9 74 Silver Lake Pavilions (2) / Schuttee (1) 1 24 3 18 Soccer Field Rentals* 2 3 3 9 Stage – Mobile Platform 1 13 1 16 *These numbers reflect groups that utilized our facilities during November. John W. Pitts Recreation Center Total Program Attendance Facility Usage By The Hour 14,000 660 640 12,000 620 10,000 600 8,000 580 560 6,000 540 4,000 520 500 2,000 480 0 460 Nov 11 Dec 11 Ja n 12 Feb 12 Ma r 12 Apr 12 Ma y 12 June 12 July 12 Aug 12 Sept 12 Oct 12 Nov 12 Nov 11 Dec 11 Ja n 12 Feb 12 Ma r 12 Apr 12 Ma y 12 June 12 July 12 Aug 12 Sept 12 Oct 12 Nov 12

NOVEMBER Program Attendance** NOVEMBER 12 FYTD 13 FYTD 12 11 Total 3,780 11,018 3,929 10,614 Open Gym 984 3,483 816 2,906 Fitness Classes 304 1,576 356 1,661 Leagues 1,200 3,255 1,195 3,210 Camps 0 254 0 348 Sports Classes 123 616 118 676 Meetings & Rentals 1,165 1,793 1,432 1,707 Enrichment Classes 3 40 12 106 ** Program Attendance figures includes participants, parents and spectators in the facility. NOVEMBER Facility Usage By The Hour NOVEMBER 12 FYTD 13 FYTD 12 11 Open Gym 495.75 2,369.75 437.75 2,327.5 Fitness Classes 44.5 214 43 224 Leagues 38 126 24 110 Camps 0 49 0 44 Sports Classes 19.5 79 12 105 Meetings & Rentals 37.5 131.5 56 124.5 Enrichment Classes 1.5 16 6 50 Total Facility Usage Hours 636.75 2,985.25 578.75 2,985 Since our opening in late April 2008, we have had 230,766 guests at the John W. Pitts Recreation Center. We are issuing FREE Recreation Center ID Cards to track facility usage during Public Open Gym Periods. The statistics listed below reflect those that have completed the registration. Open Gym Registrations: Total ID cards issued: 5,307 City Residents: 2,350 (44%) Non-City Residents: 2,957 (56%) Kent County Residents: 2,438 (46%) Sussex County Residents: 184 (3%) New Castle County Residents: 110 (2%) Out of State Residents: 225 (4%) HIGHLIGHTS Recreation Staff assisted with logistics for the Capital Holiday Festival. It’s estimated that 1,000 patrons attended the family event. The Annual Food Drive was successful again this year. We were able to supply food to Sheppard’s Place, Whatcoat United Methodist Church, Calvary Christian Church and Interfaith Men’s Homeless Shelter. The winter youth basketball league, once again this year we filled every team and we are taking a waiting list for the league. A total of 170 children were placed on a team for this winter’s program. Submitted by: Ann Marie Townshend, AICP Planning & Community Development Director

Date Range: From 11/01/2012 to 11/30/2012 Incident Type Report (Summary) Dover Fire Department Count Pct of Total Est Total Est Incident Type Incidents Loss Loss 1 Fire 111 Building fire 3 3.85% $0 0.00% 113 Cooking fire, confined to container 9 11.54% $0 0.00% 121 Fire in mobile home used as fixed residence 1 1.28% $0 0.00% 131 Passenger vehicle fire 3 3.85% $0 0.00% 143 Grass fire 1 1.28% $0 0.00% 150 Outside rubbish fire, other 2 2.56% $0 0.00% Totals 19 24.36% $0 0.00% 2 Overpressure Rupture, Explosion, Overheat(no fire) Totals 0 0.00% $0 0.00% 3 Rescue & Emergency Medical Service Incident 300 Rescue, EMS incident, other 1 1.28% $0 0.00% 322 Motor vehicle accident with injuries 1 1.28% $0 0.00% 331 Lock-in (if lock out , use 511 ) 1 1.28% $0 0.00% Totals 3 3.85% $0 0.00% 4 Hazardous Condition (No Fire) 400 Hazardous condition, other 2 2.56% $0 0.00% 412 Gas leak (natural gas or LPG) 2 2.56% $0 0.00% 424 Carbon monoxide incident 1 1.28% $0 0.00% 440 Electrical wiring/equipment problem, other 3 3.85% $0 0.00% Totals 8 10.26% $0 0.00% 5 Service Call 510 Person in distress, other 1 1.28% $0 0.00% 522 Water or steam leak 2 2.56% $0 0.00% 531 Smoke or odor removal 1 1.28% $0 0.00% 551 Assist police or other governmental agency 3 3.85% $0 0.00% 561 Unauthorized burning 1 1.28% $0 0.00% Totals 8 10.26% $0 0.00% 6 Good Intent Call 600 Good intent call, other 6 7.69% $0 0.00% 611 Dispatched & canceled en route 3 3.85% $0 0.00% 631 Authorized controlled burning 2 2.56% $0 0.00% 650 Steam, other gas mistaken for smoke, other 1 1.28% $0 0.00% 651 Smoke scare, odor of smoke 1 1.28% $0 0.00% 652 Steam, vapor, fog or dust thought to be smoke 1 1.28% $0 0.00% Totals 14 17.95% $0 0.00% 7 False Alarm & False Call 700 False alarm or false call, other 12 15.38% $0 0.00% 730 System malfunction, other 4 5.13% $0 0.00% 733 Smoke detector activation due to malfunction 2 2.56% $0 0.00% 735 Alarm system sounded due to malfunction 2 2.56% $0 0.00% 743 Smoke detector activation, no fire - unintentional 4 5.13% $0 0.00% 745 Alarm system activation, no fire - unintentional 2 2.56% $0 0.00% Totals 26 33.33% $0 0.00% 8 Severe Weather & Natural Disaster Date: 12/17/2012 Page: 1

Date Range: From 11/01/2012 to 11/30/2012 Incident Type Report (Summary) Dover Fire Department Count Pct of Total Est Total Est Incident Type Incidents Loss Loss Totals 0 0.00% $0 0.00% 9 Special Incident Type Totals 0 0.00% $0 0.00% Totals 78 $0 Date: 12/17/2012 Page: 2

Date Range: From 11/01/2012 to 11/30/2012 Manpower Hours by Sitation Found Dover Fire Department Num ber of Hours by Situation Found Sum of # Attending X Incident Length Fire 180 Fire 0 Overpressure Rupture, Exp Overpressure Rupture, Exp 54 Rescue & Emergency Medica 64 Hazardous Condition (No F 14 Service Call Rescue & Emergency Medica 56 Good Intent Call 136 False Alarm & False Call 0 Severe Weather & Natural 0 Special Incident Type Severe Weather & Natural Special Incident Type Hazardous Condition (No F Service Call False Alarm & False Call Good Intent Call Date: 12/17/2012 Page: 1

Date Range: From 01/01/2012 to 11/30/2012 Alarms by Month of Year Dover Fire Department 105 98 100 94 91 95 89 90 83 84 80 85 78 78 80 72 72 75 70 65 60 55 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Jan-2012 Feb-2012 Mar-2012 Apr-2012 May-2012 Jun-2012 Jul-2012 Aug-2012 Sep-2012 Oct-2012 Nov-2012 Date: 12/17/2012 Page: 1

Date Range: From 11/01/2012 to 11/30/2012 Incident Run Log Company: All Companies Dover Fire Department Sorted by: Incident Number Date FDID Incident# Alarm ### Address Suite Type 11/01/2012 30046 2012-000843 03:04 1300 S FARMVIEW DR M System malfunction, other Dispatched to above address for a AFA. Upon arrival found that the fire alarm was sounding. Crews investigated and found nothing. Called for maintenance to turn off the alarm . CLeared. 11/01/2012 30046 2012-000844 10:07 640 S STATE ST Outside rubbish fire, other Vehicle fire out prior to arrival. Fire contained to dashboard and drivers side door. 11/01/2012 30046 2012-000845 18:14 51 WEBBS LN F Good intent call, other Dispatched to above address for a gas leak. Upon arrival a subject related that he heard gas coming thru the pipes and thought it was leaking. The subject was mentally challenged. No leak. cleared. 11/03/2012 30046 2012-000846 06:03 567 WESTWOOD DR Carbon monoxide incident CREWS FOUND 31PPM OF CO IN THE ABOVE ADDRESS. E4'S CREW PROVIDED POSITIVE PRESSURE TO CLEAR THE HOME AND CLEARED. B 41 EVALUATED A 30 Y/O FEMALE FOR POSSIBLE CO POISING AND OBTAINED A PATIENT REFUSAL. WRITER ALSO REQUESTED CHESAPEKE UTILITIES TO CHECK THE HOME FOR PROBLEMS WITH GAS LINES. 11/03/2012 30046 2012-000847 17:57 625 NIMITZ RD Cooking fire, confined to container Writer found unattended cooking on the stove. No action was needed and writer cleared. 11/03/2012 30046 2012-000848 21:17 426 S NEW ST Assist police or other governmental agency CANCELLED 11/03/2012 30046 2012-000849 23:31 BAY RD Rescue, EMS incident, other Dover Fire units dispatched to a reported MVC with subjects trapped. Upon arrival of Dover 16, found a two vehicle MVC with confirmed one subject trapped in a vehicle on fire. Two other patients were being attended to by on scene EMS. Dover units extingiuished the vehicle that was on fire however were unable to remove victim from burning vehicle before conditions uncompatable with life presented. Crews assisted EMS with patient care on the two other patients. Crews were unable to remove trapped victim till hours later after DSP had finished investigation. 11/04/2012 30046 2012-000850 00:11 1525 MCKEE RD False alarm or false call, other CREWS COMPLETED A WALK THROUGH OF THE BUILDING WITH NEGATIVE RESULTS. THE CITY WAS FLUSHING FIRE HYDRANTS IN THE AREA WHICH SET OFF THE SYSTEM. 11/04/2012 30046 2012-000851 00:30 1131 N DUPONT HWY Dispatched & canceled en route CANCELLED BY DOVER POLICE PRIOR TO OUR ARRIVAL. 11/04/2012 30046 2012-000852 01:28 BAY RD Assist police or other governmental agency ASSIST DSP WITH THE REMOVAL OF A BODY AS A RESULT OF A FATAL MVC. 11/04/2012 30046 2012-000853 15:53 SLAUGHTER ST Outside rubbish fire, other RESPONDED TO THE WOODS NEAR THE ABOVE INTERSECTION FOR A REPORTED DEBRIS FIRE. UPON ARRIVAL, TWO TIRES WERE DISCOVERED TO BE INTENTIONALLY SET ON FIRE. NO INCENDIARY DEVICES OR ACCELERANT WERE FOUND. CITY FM DID NOT RESPOND AND NO WITNESSES COULD BE LOCATED. APPROX 20 GALLONS OF WATER WERE USED TO EXTINGUISH THE FIRE. 11/04/2012 30046 2012-000854 19:37 45 WINGED FOOT RD False alarm or false call, other DFD received an alarm activation from the above residence. The occupants contacted the alarm company and advised everything was okay. Writer cancelled the incident. 11/05/2012 30046 2012-000855 05:30 750 MILLER DR Electrical wiring/equipment problem, other Dispatched to above address for a electrical fire. Upon arrival found smoke in a residence. Crews from E4 and L1 investigated and found a electrical problem. Turned off the breaker to the area and related to the residence to call an electrian before turning it back on . Cleared. 11/05/2012 30046 2012-000856 07:17 1131 BAY RD LOT 14 Good intent call, other Dispatched to above address for smoke in a trailer. Upon arrival found that the resident had turned on her oven and it started smoking due to being dirty. Cleared. 11/05/2012 30046 2012-000857 09:19 120 S GOVERNORS AVE A System malfunction, other Dispatched to above address for aAFA upon arrival crew from E4investigated and found a malfunction. Cleared. 11/05/2012 30046 2012-000858 09:36 1061 N DUPONT HWY Alarm system activation, no fire - unintentional Dispatched to above address for a AFA water flow alarm. Upon arrival crews from E4 and L1 investigated. Found that a service tech was testing the water flow system in another store which set off the alarm for all of the stores. cleared. Scene turned over to DFM1. 11/06/2012 30046 2012-000859 08:05 2020 SHARON HILL RD Alarm system sounded due to malfunction Dispatched to the above location for an AFA. Upon arrival, was met by a respondent on scene. Alarm panel kitchen detectors and hall detectors in alarm. No smoke or fire condition was present. The detectors in the kitchen were hanging from the ceiling and the respondent related to on going work. The building was placed on fire watch until the system has been returned to normal. User: Parsell, Greg 11/6/2012 08:47:45 11/07/2012 30046 2012-000860 04:25 185 N GOVERNORS BLVD Building fire DFD responded to the above address in reference to a building fire. Engine 4 arrived on location and observed a one story, single family dwelling with heavy fire conditions. Engine 4 secured a water supply utilizing a 5" supply line and then the crew from Engine 4 advanced a 1 3/4" preconnect line to the front door for fire attack Ladder 2 arrived and secured the power to the residence and assisted the interior crews. Engine 3 arrived and placed a second preconnect line in service for fire attack. I than requested a second alarm and requested the upgrade to be filled. Engine 6 arrived, with Engine 41-1 and 54-5. The crew from 41-1 were instructed to assist with interior operation and 54-5's crew was assigned RIT. The fire was subsequently extinguished and extensive overhaul was performed. Two occupants of the Date: 12/17/2012 Page: 1 Time:10:41

Date FDID Incident# Alarm ### Address Suite Type residence were transported to Bayhealth E.R. for medical treatment as a result of the incident. As crews were placing the apparatus's back in service, a fire fighter from Station 54 became ill and had to be transported to Bayhealth E.R. for treatment. FM-28 responded to the scene for further investigation. At 0603, all Dover Fire Department personnel departed the scene and same was turned over to FM-28. 11/07/2012 30046 2012-000861 13:22 3000 PINE CABIN RD BLDG G False alarm or false call, other Crews completed a walk through of the building with negative results. The alarm was reset prior to our arrival. The state fmo was made aware. 11/09/2012 30046 2012-000862 18:37 W LOOCKERMAN ST & S Motor vehicle accident with injuries On arrival found a two vehicle MVC involving a DART bus. A63 was on Scene with 2 injuries on the bus. Crews assisted with packaging of both patients. A43 and A63 transported to KGH. All units cleared. 11/10/2012 30046 2012-000863 13:57 9 STATE CIR Hazardous condition, other E4 responded to the above address in reference to a gas odor in the residence. Crews checked the building and met with negative results. No further action taken. 11/11/2012 30046 2012-000864 02:00 1300 S FARMVIEW DR D False alarm or false call, other DFD responded to the above address in reference to an alarm activation. Crews checked the building and met with negative results. 11/11/2012 30046 2012-000865 13:21 541 BUCKSON DR Water or steam leak Dispatched to the above location for a water problem. Upon arrival, crews secured the main water shutoff in the basement. The homeowner had used a leaking faucet and when she turned the handle, the guts of the faucet let go and caused a stream of water to come out of the opening. Advised the homeowner that she would be without water until the plumber came tomorrow (previously scheduled) User: O'Connor, Jr., Michael 11/11/2012 13:49:12 11/11/2012 30046 2012-000866 21:08 220 ORCHARD AVE Authorized controlled burning Writer responded and found a controlled burn in a firepit in the rear yard of 224 Orchard Ave. The fire had been extinguished prior to FD arrival. 11/11/2012 30046 2012-000867 22:19 464 E WATER ST Electrical wiring/equipment problem, other E4, L2, L1 responded for report of electrical outlet sparking, that had been extinguished. E4 arrived and writer assumed command. E4s crew went inside and found a fire inside the wall that joined the living room and kitchen together. The fire was isolated to same and crews secured the power to the residence. Scene was turned over to FM-2 and Ingram Management Company. 11/12/2012 30046 2012-000868 10:38 631 RIDGELY ST Smoke detector activation due to malfunction Dispatched to above address for a AFA. Upon arrival crews from E4 and L1investiagted. A faulty Smoke detector was found activated. Scene turned over to DFM2. 11/12/2012 30046 2012-000869 13:15 101 BABB DR Cooking fire, confined to container UNATTENDED COOKING APT 114 11/12/2012 30046 2012-000870 15:45 1365 N DUPONT HWY 3054 Good intent call, other Crews checked for an odor of gas in the JC Penny/Mall entrance area. Crews found that lends crafter forgot to turn on there exhaust fan prior to grinding glass. 11/12/2012 30046 2012-000871 23:34 30 S NEW ST Good intent call, other UPON INVESTIGATION CREWS FOUND A BAD ELEMENT IN STOVE. SECURED POWER TO THE STOVE AND ADVISED THE OCCUPANTS TO CONTACT MAINTENANCE. 11/13/2012 30046 2012-000872 15:55 128 LYNNHAVEN DR Good intent call, other RESPONDED TO THE ABOVE ADDRESS FOR A REPORT OF A POSSIBLE ILLEGAL BURNING. AN INVESTIGATION FOUND A SMOLDERING PILE OF ASH CONTAINED WITHIN A FIRE PIT. THE EMBERS WERE SOAKED WITH WATER. FM-4 INVESTIGATED. 11/13/2012 30046 2012-000873 20:35 1131 BAY RD LOT 161 Hazardous condition, other Dispatched to above address for smoke coming out of a vacant trailer. Upon arrival found a smoke condition inside a trailer. Made forcibla entry and found the heater smoking. Cut the electric to the trailer and turned scene over to park management. Cleared. 11/14/2012 30046 2012-000874 15:37 WESTON DR Gas leak (natural gas or LPG) 22, E4, U1, E 54-5 responded for report of a gas leak with fire blowing out of a construction site away from the building. Writer arrived and assumed command. U1 under the direction of 21 was placed in charge of the crews at the site with two 1 3'4 lines along with Chesapeake Utilities. E 54-5 arrived and their crew was placed on one of the lines near the fire site. Crews provided fire protection for Gas crews while the leak was stopped away from the original leak site. Gas crews located the line and stopped the leak. The remainder of the fire was extinguised by E4's crew. Booker T. Washington Elementary School , William Henry Middle School and the residences on Ridgely St. were all evacuated as a precautionary measure until the leak was secured. Once it was deemed safe they returned to their buildings. Dover PD was ordered to shut the roadway down between Saulsbury Rd. and Fulton St. extended again until the scene was safe. Units responding were E4, E54-5, 54-15, 22, 21, Dover PD, Cheseapeake Utilities, FM-4, and E 41-4 provided cover up for Station 1. 11/14/2012 30046 2012-000875 18:30 404 NEW CASTLE AVE Electrical wiring/equipment problem, other E4, L2, E6 responded to above for report of smoke in the residence. E4 arrived and writer assumed command. E4s crew located a burnt out light bulb the cause of the call. Scene was placed under control and scene was turned over to homeowner. 11/14/2012 30046 2012-000876 19:56 411 S QUEEN ST Water or steam leak Writer responded to above for report of a water leak in apartment 220. Writer located the leak in apartment 320 and secured water to same. Scene was turned over to residents and maintenance. 11/15/2012 30046 2012-000877 08:18 1424 FORREST AVE Passenger vehicle fire E3 responded to above along with 22. E3 arrived and found a vehicle with fire in the engine compartment. Command was assumed by 22 . Fire was extinguished and contained to the engine compartment of the vehicle. Date: 12/17/2012 Page: 2 Time:10:41

Date FDID Incident# Alarm ### Address Suite Type Vehicle belonged to a Ms. Thomas who was on scene and advised she would have to have the vehicle towed due to it being on private property. She was also advised to contact her insurance company. Vehicle was a Pontiac Grand Am Silver in color. 11/15/2012 30046 2012-000878 10:21 1061 N DUPONT HWY Gas leak (natural gas or LPG) E4 and L1 responded for report of odor of gas from the business One Main Financial. Crews from E4 and L1 found odor of gas in the building and were unable to located the heater unit due to the drop ceiling in the business itself. Chesapeake arrived on scene and secured the main to the business. Manager was advised to keep it shut off until maintenance to check out the heater units. Scene was turned over to Chesapeake. 11/15/2012 30046 2012-000879 21:06 320 W BROAD ST Dispatched & canceled en route Cancelled after dispatch 11/16/2012 30046 2012-000880 03:15 411 S QUEEN ST False alarm or false call, other E4 responded to above for report of alarm sounding . Crews investigated and found no problems. 11/16/2012 30046 2012-000881 07:48 1136 WOODSEDGE RD Steam, vapor, fog or dust thought to be smoke Dispatched to a possible chimney fire. Upon arrival, found no fire or smoke condition. Investigation reveled no recent fires in the fire place. The heater had kicked on and might have produced steam or smoke. Cleared the scene. User: O'Connor, Jr., Michael 11/19/2012 21:21:28 11/18/2012 30046 2012-000882 10:19 255 WEBBS LN A Cooking fire, confined to container Responded to the above address for the alarm sounding with smoke on the second floor. Arrived on location with Engine 4> Crew from Engine 4 investigated to find unattended cooking in Apt 22. Scene was placed under control and maitenence was requested to make a response. Engine 4 returned and the alarm was silenced. 11/18/2012 30046 2012-000883 11:36 766 TOWNSEND BLVD. Assist police or other governmental agency Responded to the above location to assist DPD with a child locked in an car. 11/18/2012 30046 2012-000884 14:59 149 PRESIDENT DR Building fire On arrival found a 1 story single family dwelling with the rear porch on fire. The fire had been partically extinguished by resident on arrival. Crews advanced an 1-3/4 line to the rear of the residence and finished extinguishing same. Ladder 2's crew overhualed the exterior while Ladder 1 checked for extension on the inside of the residence. Scene turned over to FM13. All units cleared. 11/18/2012 30046 2012-000885 16:07 1200 N DUPONT HWY Smoke detector activation, no fire - unintentional Responded to Evers Hall at DSU for a report of smoke detector activation in the basement. After a walk through of the basement found a smoke detector activated from students smoking pot. Scene was placed under control and turned over to DSU police. 11/18/2012 30046 2012-000886 18:22 51 WEBBS LN L Cooking fire, confined to container DFD responded to the above address in reference to an alarm activation. On arrival, crews located unattended cooking on the first floor. No further action taken. 11/19/2012 30046 2012-000887 07:18 1015 E DIVISION ST Passenger vehicle fire Dispatched to the above location for a car fire with possible exposure to a detached garage. While en route, dispatch advised that they were taking multiple calls and the LCVFC Brush unit was on scene. Upon arrival, found a car parked in front of a detached garage in an alley way. LCVFC Brush unit had deployed a 1" booster line in an attempt to extinguish the flames. E-4's crew deployed a 1-3/4" attack line from the front bumper and finished the extinguishment of the car fire. E-3 arrived on scene and deployed a second attack line to protect the garage exposure. CWVFC E-41-1 arrived on scene and helped with overhaul. Crews entered the garage and found no extension, although the exterior door was damaged in an attempt to open it. The hood and truck were opened on the fire vehicle and a complete overhaul was accomplished. The homeowner relates that he was being kind and allowed the neighbor to park their car next to his garage yesterday. The owner of the vehicle (Juanita Williams of 986 Whatcoat Dr, Apt 22, relates that she didn't know what happened to her car. She said it had been running fine. The last time it was driven was "a couple days ago" and she was in the process of selling said car. The City FMO was contacted. The scene was placed under control and turned over to FM-4. Homeowner: Lloyd Barrett (302) 734-2940 Car Owner: Juanita Williams (302) 359-6492 User: O'Connor, Jr., Michael 11/19/2012 21:14:15 11/20/2012 30046 2012-000888 05:54 1180 WALKER RD Dispatched & canceled en route WRITER CANCELLED THE CALL DUE TO RP CALLING BACK STATING BOWL OF OATMEAL WAS STEAMING AND SET THE ALARM OFF. 11/20/2012 30046 2012-000889 11:28 1200 N DUPONT HWY System malfunction, other WRITER WAS ADVISED PAINTERS SET IT OFF ON ACCIDENT AND DSU PD WAS TAKING CARE OF THE ALARM . 11/20/2012 30046 2012-000890 13:29 526 FULTON ST Building fire Dispatched to above address for a houes fire. Upon arrival DPD on scene and related that the fire was out. Crew from E4 investigated and found a curtin had cought fire but was out. No other service needed. Scene turned over to DFM4. 11/20/2012 30046 2012-000891 16:32 213 EISENHOWER DR System malfunction, other Dispatched to above address for AFA. Had crew from E4 to investigate. Under control. 11/20/2012 30046 2012-000892 17:55 BAY SIDE DR SR9 & BAY RD US113 Passenger vehicle fire E4 RESPONDED AND FOUND DEBRIS IN THE BED OF THE FORD F250 ON FIRE . THIS WAS EXTINGUISHED USING 5 GALLONS OF WATER . SCENE WAS TURNED OVER TO DSP . THE CAUSE OF THE FIRE WAS A CIGARETTE THAT WAS DISCARDED WHILE DRIVING. 11/21/2012 30046 2012-000893 11:41 151 ROOSEVELT AVE Steam, other gas mistaken for smoke, other Reported gas leak on an empty drum. 11/21/2012 30046 2012-000894 15:21 1030 FORREST AVE 133 False alarm or false call, other CREWS COMPLETED A WALK THROUGH OF THE BUILDING WITH NEGATIVE RESULTS. STORE MANAGER WAS ADVISED THE SYSTEM WAS BEING PLACED ON FIRE WATCH AND UNITS CLEARED. Date: 12/17/2012 Page: 3 Time:10:41

Date FDID Incident# Alarm ### Address Suite Type 11/22/2012 30046 2012-000895 06:01 1706 N DUPONT HWY Cooking fire, confined to container WRITER FOUND BURNED BACON IN THE OVEN, WHICH SET THE ALARM OFF. 11/22/2012 30046 2012-000896 10:21 320 BILLY MITCHELL LN False alarm or false call, other DFD responded to the above location in reference to an alarm activation. On arrival, crews checked the entire building and met with negative results. 11/22/2012 30046 2012-000897 11:05 39 HIDDEN VALLEY DR Cooking fire, confined to container CREWS FOUND A BURNED TURKEY IN THE OVEN,AND UNITS CLEARED. 11/22/2012 30046 2012-000898 17:51 986 WHATCOAT DR Person in distress, other Writer responded to the above address in reference to a child handcuffing herself. On arrival, Dover PD had taken care of the incident. No action taken. 11/22/2012 30046 2012-000899 22:10 910 WHATCOAT DR Smoke detector activation, no fire - unintentional Responded to the above address for the alarm system going off. Did a walk through to find a smoke detector had been activated on the third floor from people smoking in the building. Scene was placed under control and i returned. 11/23/2012 30046 2012-000900 00:57 321 CHARRING CROSS DR Smoke scare, odor of smoke Responded to the above address for a report from DoverPD of smoke coming from the house. I arrived on location in the command car with possible smoke coming from the roof area. Thick fog made it hard to see. Dover PD advised me they had cleared all the houses except 321 Charring Cross because no one was home. I advised dispatch that I was making forcible entry into 321. Ladder 1 arrived on location and did a walk through of the house with negative results. Scene was placed under control and all units returned. It was determined that the smoke was steam. 11/23/2012 30046 2012-000901 08:35 1011 BAY RD Alarm system sounded due to malfunction ALARM MALFUNCTION, FM 4 ADVISED BUSINESS WAS ON FIREWATCH. DFD CANCELLED RESPONSE. 11/23/2012 30046 2012-000902 08:36 201 STOVER BLVD Smoke detector activation due to malfunction SMOKE DETETOR ACTIVATION IN ROOM 303. ALARM MALFUNCTION. 11/23/2012 30046 2012-000903 08:38 2876 SHARON HILL RD Smoke detector activation, no fire - unintentional SMOKE DETECTOR SET OFF BY STEAM FROM SHOWER. DFD CANCELLED BY ALARM COMPANY. 11/23/2012 30046 2012-000904 11:04 30 THE GREEN Smoke detector activation, no fire - unintentional On arrival Occupant advised that they were spray sealant in the area of the smoke detector which activated same. Alarm was reset prior to FD arrival. 11/23/2012 30046 2012-000905 13:35 1708 E LEBANON RD Lock-in (if lock out , use 511 ) Unsuccessfull on a lock joc 11/23/2012 30046 2012-000906 23:31 DEER TRACK LA Grass fire 11/24/2012 30046 2012-000907 11:27 463 SUSSEX AVE Cooking fire, confined to container E4, L2 RESPONDED FOR REPORT OF SMOKE IN THE STRUCTURE . CREWS INVESTIGATED AND FOUND UNATTENDED COOKING FROM SAME. 11/24/2012 30046 2012-000908 12:14 141 S QUEEN ST Good intent call, other DOVER FM1 WAS REQUESTED BY CHESAPEAKE UTILITIES TO RESPOND TO ABOVE ADDRESS. 11/25/2012 30046 2012-000909 14:00 1300 S FARMVIEW DR F Cooking fire, confined to container E4, L1, AND L2 RESPONDED FOR REPORT OF SMOKE IN THE BUILDING. E4 ARRIVED AND CREWS BEGAN TO INVESTIGATE. L2 ARRIVED AND WRITER ESTABLISHED AND ASSUMED COMMAND. E4 ALPHA REPORTED UNDER CONTROL UNATTENDED COOKING IN F27. ALL UNITS RETURNED. 11/26/2012 30046 2012-000910 11:26 225 S STATE ST False alarm or false call, other CREWS FOUND A PULL STATION THAT WAS HANGING OFF THE WALL IN THE FRONT DOOR OF BUILDING 229 S STATE ST. CREWS COMPLETED A WALK THROUGH OF THE BUILDING WITH NEGATIVE RESULTS. 11/26/2012 30046 2012-000911 15:49 523 BUCKSON DR Unauthorized burning Brush 9 reponded to the area of Buckson Drive in reference to a pile of leaves on fire. On arrival, nothing was located and B9 cleared the area. 11/26/2012 30046 2012-000912 19:43 136 SWEETGUM DR Smoke or odor removal DFD responded to the above address in reference to a trash fire. Engine 3 arrived a determined no action was necessary and cleared. 11/27/2012 30046 2012-000913 06:23 1506 N LITTLE CREEK RD 7 Fire in mobile home used as fixed residence DFD responded to the above location in reference to a trailer fire. On arrival, writer located a single wide trailer fully involved. Engine 4's crew placed two 1 3/4" preconnect lines in service for the fire attack. Engine 3 and Engine 6 arrived and their crews assisted with the interior operations. Crews encountered heavy fire conditions but quickly extinguished the bulk of the fire. Engine 54-5 arrived and were sent inside to assit with overhaul. Crews remained on scene and completed extensive overhaul then the scene was turned over to the fire marshal's office for further investigation. 11/28/2012 30046 2012-000914 13:35 1441 N DUPONT HWY False alarm or false call, other DFD investigated an alarm activation at the above location. 11/29/2012 30046 2012-000915 11:59 510 ANN MOORE ST False alarm or false call, other Investigated an alarm activation and met with negative findings. 11/29/2012 30046 2012-000916 14:57 540 S GOVERNORS AVE Alarm system activation, no fire - unintentional On arrival found maintenance personnel welding in the rear of the building causing smoke which activated the fire alarm. Crew checked the area and units cleared. Scene turned over to FM 2. 11/29/2012 30046 2012-000917 23:10 430 COLLEGE RD 500 False alarm or false call, other Date: 12/17/2012 Page: 4 Time:10:41

Date FDID Incident# Alarm ### Address Suite Type Dover 17 responded and investigated an alarm activation at the above location. Negative Findings. 11/30/2012 30046 2012-000918 14:30 MAPLE GLEN Cooking fire, confined to container CREWS FOUND FOOD LEFT ON THE STOVE WITH NO EXTENSION. THERE WAS NO NEED FOR POSITIVE PRESSURE AND UNITS CLEARED. 11/30/2012 30046 2012-000919 18:36 538 CAROL ST Authorized controlled burning WRITER FOUND A SMALL FIRE IN A BURN POT AT THE REAR OF THE ABOVE ADDRESS. HOME OWNERS WERE ADVISED OF THE PROPER PROCEDURES AND WRITER CLEARED. 11/30/2012 30046 2012-000920 20:45 204 BAY TREE RD B False alarm or false call, other DFD responded to the above location in reference to an alarm activation. Crews met with negative findings. Total Incidents: 78

FY 12-13 City Funded Account Balance Sheet ACCOUNT BUDGET SPENT BALANCE Apparatus Repairs & Maintenance $ 67,000.00 $ 31,619.57 $ 35,380.43 Building Maintenace Supplies $ 1,650.00 $ 9.69 $ 1,640.31 Contractual Services $ 16,587.00 $ - $ 16,587.00 Electricity $ 51,820.00 $ 21,832.13 $ 29,987.87 Gasoline $ 19,050.00 $ 7,923.03 $ 11,126.97 Heating Expenses- Gas $ 20,000.00 $ 1,152.74 $ 18,847.26 Medical Supplies $ 700.00 $ - $ 700.00 Office Supplies $ 2,500.00 $ 469.40 $ 2,030.60 Other Equipment Repairs $ 4,000.00 $ - $ 4,000.00 Program Expenses $ 36,630.00 $ 12,726.86 $ 23,903.14 Radio Repairs $ 2,000.00 $ 239.07 $ 1,760.93 Safety & Security $ 2,150.00 $ - $ 2,150.00 Small Tools $ 4,800.00 $ 1,265.00 $ 3,535.00 Telephone $ 13,340.00 $ 2,524.76 $ 10,815.24 Training & Travel $ 8,815.00 $ 669.00 $ 8,146.00 Uniforms & Firefighting Gear $ 27,100.00 $ 446.57 $ 26,653.43 Water/ Sewer $ 3,150.00 $ 544.84 $ 2,605.16 Balance as of: 11/30/12

11:45 AM Robbins Hose Company # 1, Inc. 12/16/12 Accrual Basis Profit & Loss Detail November 2012 Type Date Num Name Memo Clr Split Amount Balance Ordinary Income/Expense Income City Quarterly Deposit Deposit 11/07/2012 0225248 Deposit City Fund Account 70,325.00 70,325.00 Total City Quarterly Deposit 70,325.00 70,325.00 Total Income 70,325.00 70,325.00 Expense Apparatus Repairs & Maintenance Check 11/04/2012 755 Atlantic Emergency Solutions MOR2736MOP- Engine 7 City Fund Account 2,606.55 2,606.55 Check 11/04/2012 755 Atlantic Emergency Solutions MOR2755MOP- Engine 4 City Fund Account 6,172.14 8,778.69 Check 11/04/2012 756 Carl King Tire Company Ref- 321596 City Fund Account 914.00 9,692.69 Check 11/18/2012 766 DP Fire Quick Fill for Ladder 1 City Fund Account 377.00 10,069.69 Total Apparatus Repairs & Maintenance 10,069.69 10,069.69 Building Maintenance Supplies Check 11/04/2012 757 City of Dover Invoice- 6445 City Fund Account 9.69 9.69 Total Building Maintenance Supplies 9.69 9.69 Electricity Check 11/11/2012 762 City of Dover Utility Acct # 44343-32052 City Fund Account 2,998.61 2,998.61 Check 11/18/2012 763 City of Dover Utility Acct # 44255-31966 City Fund Account 629.94 3,628.55 Total Electricity 3,628.55 3,628.55 Gasoline Check 11/11/2012 761 City of Dover Unleaded fuel- August City Fund Account 549.84 549.84 Check 11/11/2012 761 City of Dover Bio Diesel- August City Fund Account 1,121.23 1,671.07 Check 11/11/2012 761 City of Dover Unleaded fuel- September City Fund Account 490.22 2,161.29 Check 11/11/2012 761 City of Dover Bio Diesel- September City Fund Account 670.86 2,832.15 Check 11/18/2012 764 City of Dover Unleaded Fuel City Fund Account 569.96 3,402.11 Check 11/18/2012 764 City of Dover Bio-Diesel Fuel City Fund Account 1,648.44 5,050.55 Total Gasoline 5,050.55 5,050.55 Heating Expenses- Gas Check 11/11/2012 759 Chesapeake Utilities Station 2 gas- 09/25 to 10/26 City Fund Account 50.17 50.17 Check 11/11/2012 760 Chesapeake Utilities Station1 gas- 10/04 to 11/05 City Fund Account 632.81 682.98 Total Heating Expenses- Gas 682.98 682.98 Office Supplies Check 11/11/2012 761 City of Dover August Postage charges City Fund Account 19.86 19.86 Check 11/11/2012 761 City of Dover September Postage charges City Fund Account 27.65 47.51 Check 11/18/2012 764 City of Dover Postage City Fund Account 28.30 75.81 Total Office Supplies 75.81 75.81 Program Expenses Check 11/18/2012 764 City of Dover Parts for Fire Siren Repairs City Fund Account 181.32 181.32 Total Program Expenses 181.32 181.32 Telephone Check 11/04/2012 758 Verizon Wireless Wieless charges from 09/21 to 10/20 City Fund Account 84.05 84.05 Check 11/11/2012 761 City of Dover Verizon August charges City Fund Account 290.22 374.27 Check 11/11/2012 761 City of Dover Cavailier August charges City Fund Account 16.09 390.36 Check 11/11/2012 761 City of Dover Verizon September charges City Fund Account 287.78 678.14 Check 11/11/2012 761 City of Dover Cavalier September charges City Fund Account 19.49 697.63 Check 11/18/2012 764 City of Dover Verizon October charges City Fund Account 287.92 985.55 Page 1 of 2

11:45 AM Robbins Hose Company # 1, Inc. 12/16/12 Accrual Basis Profit & Loss Detail November 2012 Type Date Num Name Memo Clr Split Amount Balance Check 11/18/2012 764 City of Dover Cavalier October charges City Fund Account 15.24 1,000.79 Total Telephone 1,000.79 1,000.79 Uniforms Check 11/18/2012 765 Dover Army-Navy Store Dispatcher uniforms City Fund Account 121.31 121.31 Total Uniforms 121.31 121.31 Water/Sewer Check 11/11/2012 762 City of Dover Utility Acct # 44345-32054 City Fund Account 76.25 76.25 Check 11/11/2012 762 City of Dover Utility Acct # 44341-32050 City Fund Account 11.54 87.79 Check 11/18/2012 763 City of Dover Utility Acct # 44253-31964 City Fund Account 29.62 117.41 Total Water/Sewer 117.41 117.41 Total Expense 20,938.10 20,938.10 Net Ordinary Income 49,386.90 49,386.90 Net Income 49,386.90 49,386.90 Page 2 of 2

Monthly Report November 2012 Economic Development Office

2012 _11 Economic Development  Conference call with Calpine to discuss land use schedule  Met with Tom Kramedas to discuss incentives for new hotel  Participated in Business development roundtable on November 7, 2012  Met with Fordham Brewery to discuss water use issues  Attended Kent County Sports Complex Dedication  Tour of ILC and meeting with company’s new President  Two meetings with Calpine o Discuss annexation of Harmon property o Needs of Calpine to meet construction schedule  Wells Fargo Grant Meeting - NCALL  Met with representative of KCI Technologies Measures: 1. Maintain an unemployment rate for the City of Dover that is lower than national and state averages. 2010-2011 Actual 2011-2012 Actual 2012 - 2013 Projected Results <10% unemployment rate in <10% unemployment rate in <10% unemployment rate in July 2011 July 2012 July 2013 9.2 % - U.S. Rate 8.2% - U.S. Rate 7.7% - U.S. Rate 8.0 % - DE Rate 6.8 % - DE Rate 6.7% - DE Rate 9.9% - City of Dover Rate 8.6% - City of Dover Rate 7.7% - City of Dover Rate June 2011 – Actual June 2012 – Actual November 2012 – Actual 2. Monitor number of contacts with small businesses and with out-of-town companies interested in locating in Dover. 2010-2011 Actual 2011-2012 Actual 2012 - 2013 Projected Results ≥20 contacts with potential >20 contacts with potential >20 contacts with potential small businesses; small businesses; small businesses; 12 contacts YTD 10 Contacts YTD 9 Contacts YTD ≥15 contacts with out-of-town 11 contacts with out-of-town 11 contacts with out-of-town companies interested in companies interested in companies interested in locating in Dover. locating in Dover locating in Dover 10 contacts YTD 9 Contacts YTD 4 Contacts YTD

2012_11 DDP Monthly Report  Provided technical assistance to two (2) prospective small business individuals on overall business development within the Downtown Dover Business District as well as creating business plans.  Provided technical assistance (orientation) to one (1) existing small business owner in preparing and submitting small business loan application for loan consideration.  Continued providing technical assistance to seven (7) prospective small business individuals on locating available space within the downtown district to lease. Of these seven (7) inquiries; two (2) have signed leases to occupy current vacant spaces within downtown.  Provided technical assistance to three (3) existing small business owners on relocating businesses within district boundaries.  Continuing work with the Promotion and Marketing Committee on coordinating the series of Holidays Events scheduled to occur during November and December in downtown Dover.  Coordinated the “Capital Holiday Celebration” and logistics for the “Winter Wonderland” event held on Wednesday, November 28 in downtown Dover.  Coordinated media (newspaper announcement), website and social media press releases of series of Holidays Events scheduled to occur during November and December in downtown Dover.  Provided continuing assistance to Center for Mental Wellness staff coordinating the “Out of the Darkness Walk.” This event had 150 participants and raised $7700 to support Suicide Prevention programs.  Multiple meetings with downtown property owner and potential tenant regarding DEDO’s Pop- Up Program in an effort to reach agreement on needed repairs and lease terms following the three month Pop-up Program period which are to be rent-free to tenant.

ACTION FORM PROCEEDING: Council AGENDA ITEM NO.: DEPARTMENT OF ORIGIN: Police DATE SUBMITTED: 1/3/13 PREPARED BY: Captain Robert Scott / Administrative Division Commander SUBJECT: Office of Highway Safety (OHS) Funds Approved for In Car Cameras REFERENCE: State Grant Funding RELATED PROJECT: N/A APPROVALS: City Manager, Controller/Treasurer EXHIBITS: None EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $49,970.00 PROJECT BUDGET: $49,970.00 FUNDING SOURCE (Dept./Page in CIP & Budget): New funds not included in FY13 Budget TIMETABLE: Order already in process due to short timeline. OHS deadline is Jan 15th. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Council approval. BACKGROUND The Police Department works with the State of Delaware’s Office of Highway Safety on regular basis working numerous types of extra duty programs that promote public safety. Examples include DUI checkpoints, seatbelt checkpoints, checks for underage drinking and many others. The two agencies have developed a very positive working relationship over the many years of working together. As a result, the Office of Highway Safety periodically funds equipment purchases for the various local agencies in the state involved with their programs when they have funds available. These purchases are always staffed very informally, so there is minimal paperwork involved (i.e. no formal grant application process). The last process was worked primarily through emails coordinating information and requirements between the agencies. During Oct-Nov 12, the Office of Highway Safety indicated they had funds for in car video systems. Dover PD worked up their requirements for five units and initiated the purchase for these units totaling to $24,985 in early December. Two weeks later, the funding letter came through for 15 units, for a total of $72,000. Dover PD plans to purchase an additional five units, for a total of $49,970, and return the balance of funds since they do not have the funds needed for the purchase of the peripheral equipment for the additional units from other grant sources. The purchase of the In Car Cameras will not negatively impact our department’s operating budget. They will be used to replace systems that are currently antiquated and are slated to be replaced in the near future. This replacement cost would normally have to be included in our budget or paid through another grant source. Also, any maintenance in the first year will be covered under the maintenance agreement which is included in the initial purchase. FUNDING The equipment above will be funded by the Office of Highway Safety on a reimbursable basis.