Anexo

REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA NOVEMBER 26, 2012 - 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 COUNCILMAN JAMES L. HUTCHISON PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE LED BY COUNCILWOMAN WILLIAMS 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 November 13, 2012 2. Certificate of Appreciation - Hurricane Sandy 3. Annexation/Rezoning Public Hearing/Final Reading of Ordinance #2012-21 - Properties Located at 110 and 136 Rustic Lane (owned by Taililou, LLC) A. Annexation Referendum Results (11/15/12): 1 FOR 0 AGAINST B. Annexation Resolution No. 2012-16 C. Rezoning Public Hearing and Final Reading of Proposed Ordinance #2012-21 Amending the Zoning Designation from BG - General Business (110) and RMH - Residential Manufactured Home District (136) (Kent County Zoning Classifications) to C-2A - Limited Central Commercial (City of Dover Zoning Classification). The First Reading of the Proposed Ordinance Was Accomplished During the Council Meeting of September 10, 2012. 4. Appeal for Pension Benefits - Steve Warren and Dewey Ray Lavender

Council Agenda - November 26, 2012 Page 2 * 5. Utility Committee Report - November 13, 2012 A. Water Quality and Inflow and Infiltration (I & I) Updates (Committee Action Not Required) B. Quarterly Review of Utility Related Capital Investment Plan (CIP) (Electric and Water/Wastewater) (July, August, and September) (Due to Time Constraints, This Item Was Deferred Until the Next Meeting) C. TEA/NAES Report (August) (Due to Time Constraints, This Item Was Deferred Until the Next Meeting) D. Updates (Due to Time Constraints, This Item Was Deferred Until the Next Meeting) * 6. Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee Report - November 13, 2012 A. Proposed Ordinance #2012-23 - FY13 Budget Revisions (See Item #10-A) (Committee Recommended Adoption of Proposed Ordinance #2012-23 - FY 2013 Budget Revisions) B. Martin Luther King, Jr. Boulevard (Referred to Committee by City Council on October 8, 2012) (Committee Recommended Setting a Public Hearing Before City Council on December 10, 2012 to Consider Councilman Perza's 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.) 7. Evaluation of Bids A. HVAC Maintenance and Repair Contract B. Robbins Hose Station 2 Ramp Upgrade * 8. Reappointments Recommended by Mayor Carey - St. Jones Greenway Commission - Three (3) Year Terms to Expire December 31, 2015 A. James Burcham B. Michael P. Mercer * 9. Election of Officers - Robbins Hose Company - Year 2013 Fire Line Officers Fire Chief - Patrick W. West (Unopposed) Deputy Fire Chief - Matthew E. Carey (Unopposed) First Assistant Fire Chief - David C. Carey (Unopposed) Second Assistant Fire Chief - Mark A. Hall II (Unopposed) Third Assistant Fire Chief - Carl S. Troubetaris Sr. (Unopposed) Fourth Assistant Fire Chief - Duane A. Reeder First Fire Line Captain - Benjamin P. Smetana (Unopposed) Second Fire Line Captain - William C. Kelly II (Unopposed)

Council Agenda - November 26, 2012 Page 3 10. First Reading - Proposed Ordinance #2012-23 The First Reading is offered on the following proposed ordinance. Final action by Council will take place during the Second Reading of the ordinance on December 10, 2012. Copies of all proposed ordinances are available at the entrance of the Council Chambers or can be obtained from the City Clerk's Office. A. Proposed Ordinance #2012-23 - FY13 Budget Revisions (Staff Sponsored) (Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee) 11. Council Members Announcements /tm S:\AGENDAS-MINUTES-PACKETS\Council-Agendas\2012\11-26-2012.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 November 13, 2012 at 7:30 p.m. with Council President Leary presiding. Council members present were Mr. Anderson, Mr. Lynn, Mr. Perza, Mrs. Williams, Mr. Hare, and Mr. Hutchison. Mr. Bonar was absent. Council staff members present were Police Chief Hosfelt, Mrs. Mitchell, Mr. Koenig, Mrs. Townshend, Fire Chief Fortney, 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. Mr. EShed Alston, 406 Arnold Court, informed members that earlier this evening, he spoke during the Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee meeting in regard to Agenda Item #2 - Martin Luther King, Jr. Boulevard. He stated that he waited patiently until everyone else had spoken and then raised issues which he thought were relevant to issues involving the black community, specifically in regard to lynching of citizens in the black community. Mr. Alston stated his feeling that he was treated in a very disrespectful way by [Chairman Lynn]. He stated that Mr. Lynn referred to Chief Hosfelt in the audience and Mr. Alston conjectured that this was to have him arrested. He stated that there was a Caucasian man who spoke about the Presbyterian Church and a woman who had written a book, and that in his opinion these things were off subject, but that this man was not interrupted one (1) time and he spoke over the time allotted. Mr. Alston expressed his opinion that there is a racially-oriented double standard where Caucasians who are in power in this town treat black people one way and Caucasians another. He further explained that he, currently, had an appeal to the United States Supreme Court alleging that the most racist State in America today is not Mississippi, Alabama, or Georgia but the First State, Delaware, which has changed the least in this regard. Mr. Douglas W. Beatty, 50 North Draper Circle, Magnolia, reminded members that he had relayed concerns during the Open Forum Segment on October 22, 2012 regarding a death that was ruled a suicide, an assault not being investigated, and a leaflet campaign. Since that time, he stated that additional information had been obtained regarding the incident involving Henry Fordham and felt that the Police Chief may have been misled. Mr. Beatty explained that statements made by the Police Chief regarding the September 21st incident at Silver Lake differ from that of the individual who actually made the 911 call. He suggested that this matter be revisited by the City and that an independent investigation be launched regarding these matters. The invocation was given by Mr. Herb Konowitz, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. AGENDA ADDITIONS/DELETIONS Mr. Hutchison moved for approval of the agenda as presented, seconded by Mrs. Williams and unanimously carried.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 13, 2012 PAGE 2 Mr. Hare moved for approval of the consent agenda as presented, seconded by Mr. Hutchison and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Bonar absent). ADOPTION OF MINUTES - REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 22, 2012 The Minutes of the Regular Council Meeting of October 22, 2012 were unanimously approved by motion of Mr. Hare, seconded by Mr. Hutchison, and bore the written approval of Mayor Carey. CERTIFICATE OF CONGRATULATIONS - ELIZABETH W. MURPHEY SCHOOL 90TH ANNIVERSARY The following Certificate of Congratulations was read into the record by the City Clerk: CERTIFICATE OF CONGRATULATIONS Presented to Elizabeth W. Murphey School for Providing less fortunate children the fullest opportunity to develop toward useful and efficient lives for 90 successful years. The City of Dover extends its congratulations on this special milestone. We thank you for your continued dedication to fostering each child, and ensuring their happy childhood. Presented on the 13th day of November two thousand and twelve. Mayor Carey presented the Certificate to Mr. Joe McDaniel, President of the Board of Directors, and relayed appreciation for the services provided to the City of Dover. Mr. McDaniel thanked members for the recognition and reminded them that Mr. Murphey was very forward looking in providing the monies and facilities that established the School. He expressed his hope that the next 90 years would prove to be as beneficial as the past 90 years. He noted that the “poster child” for the Elizabeth W. Murphey School was none other than Councilman James L. Hutchison, a graduate of the School. PROCLAMATION - CLASSROOM KINDNESS WEEK The City Clerk read the following Proclamation into the record: WHEREAS, the most influential people in many children’s lives, outside of family, are the school teachers with whom they spend their days; and WHEREAS, teachers are rarely thanked or recognized for their tireless efforts to shape children’s lives and empower their futures; and

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 13, 2012 PAGE 3 WHEREAS, the Be Kind People Project, a non-profit organization dedicated to improving the nation’s educational environment by recognizing teachers and positively impacting students, will launch a major initiative to thank teachers and promote kindness in the classroom; and WHEREAS, in collaboration with Teach for America, the Be Kind People Project will bestow gifts of appreciation and classroom kindness kits to hundreds of teachers throughout Dover in hopes of sparking a movement to express gratitude to teachers while inspiring kindness; and WHEREAS, Dover’s teachers are unsung heroes who deserve this special acknowledgment. NOW, THEREFORE, I, CARLETON E. CAREY, SR., MAYOR OF THE CITY OF DOVER, DELAWARE, do hereby proclaim the week of November 12, 2012 to be CLASSROOM KINDNESS WEEK in the City of Dover and urge all residents to take a moment to express their gratitude to all teachers for a job well done and celebrate the essential contributions they make to children’s futures. Mayor Carey presented the Proclamation to Ms. Laurisa Schutt, Executive Director of the Be Kind People Project, and Corpsmen Caitlin Dortch, Alexandra Czoschke, and Diane Codding. Ms. Schutt indicated that there was no other profession that has so much influence as the extraordinary profession of teaching, since teachers affect children’s lives for generations. She thanked all teachers for their contributions and had those present introduce themselves, as follows: Ms. Alexandra Czosche, teacher of 9th through 12th grade English at the Kent County Alternative Program; Ms. Caitlyn Dortch, teacher of 8th grade Science at Central Middle School; and Ms. Diane Codding, teacher of 10th and 12th grade English and Language Arts (ELA) at Dover High School. Ms. Schutt accepted the Proclamation on behalf of all teachers. GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS (GIS) DAY AND GEOGRAPHY AWARENESS WEEK The City Clerk read the following Proclamation into the record: WHEREAS, fascination with the earth’s geography inspired the early explorers of our country to learn and record information about the surface of the land and its people, environments, resources, political boundaries, and characteristics and today remains a fundamental part of our national heritage; and WHEREAS, geographic information has many useful applications for our municipal government and is a valuable resource used in the analysis of infrastructure, emergency services, economic development, and long-range planning; and WHEREAS; Geographic Information Systems (GIS) technology provides an efficient means of managing geographic information and providing data that allows for effective decision-making and improved delivery of services to the residents of the City of Dover and our surrounding area; and

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 13, 2012 PAGE 4 WHEREAS, the City of Dover’s GIS Department plays a vital role in the continued growth of the City and has been nationally recognized for its outstanding efforts in the advancement of GIS and its foresight in creating programs that can be used to better manage services in the City. NOW, THEREFORE, I, CARLETON E. CAREY, SR., MAYOR OF THE CITY OF DOVER, DELAWARE, do hereby proclaim November 14, 2012 as GIS Day, and November 11 – 17, 2012 as GEOGRAPHY AWARENESS WEEK in the City of Dover and urge all residents to adopt the national Geography Awareness Week theme, “Declare Your Interdependence,” by exploring our community’s connection to our neighbors around the globe using geographic skills such as mapping, photography, and storytelling, and to learn about the value of GIS technology in the management and exchange of geographic information. PRESENTATION - MPO REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN (KATE LAYTON) Ms. Kate Layton, Dover/Kent County Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) Public Liaison, presented a Power Point Presentation of the Dover/Kent County MPO Metropolitan Transportation Plan 2013-2040. In response to Mrs. Williams, Ms. Layton explained that synchronization of traffic lights within a municipality was within the purview of the municipality, and lights outside municipalities were controlled by the Delaware Department of Transportation (DelDOT). Mr. Anderson requested assurance that there would be proper pedestrian crossings at the new Dover High School, explaining safety concerns that had been relayed. In addition, he suggested that the DelDOT be more “business friendly” in their consideration of any improvements in the area when the regulations are being made. Responding to Mr. Anderson regarding the St. Jones improvements, Ms. Layton stated that these improvements were a part of the First State Trails and Pathways Plan and were incorporated as a project in the MPO’s Regional Bicycle Plan, which was adopted a year ago. She indicated that this project was related to a recent workshop held regarding the downtown area and how it connects with the Transit Hub at Queen and Water Streets. Mr. Anderson felt that these projects would improve recreation and tourism within the City. PUBLIC HEARING - VIOLATION OF THE DANGEROUS BUILDING ORDINANCE - 488 NORTH EAST AVENUE - JEFFREY E. GARRISON During their Regular Meeting on June 25, 2012, City Council held a public hearing to consider a violation of the Dangerous Building Ordinance at 488 North East Avenue, owned by Jeffrey E. Garrison. Members tabled action regarding this matter for 120 days to provide Wells Fargo the opportunity to proceed with the foreclosure action and, if at any time during this 120-day period City inspectors were to find the property to be a hazard or find a continuing increase in hazardous conditions, that staff be authorized to move forward with the demolition process. Mr. Lynn moved to remove the matter from the table, seconded by Mr. Hare and unanimously carried.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 13, 2012 PAGE 5 Mrs. Ann Marie Townshend, Director of Planning and Community Development, provided a chronological history and presentation on the condition of the house located at 488 North East Avenue (Exhibit #1). She stated that although the overgrowth and litter had been cleared from the property, the interior conditions had not been repaired. The property was sold at a Sheriff Sale on November 1, 2012 to HSBC Bank. According to Wells Fargo, the Veteran’s Association (VA) will be assigned the property following confirmation of the sale expected to take place in December. Given the lack of progress on correcting the violations, staff recommended the following: 1) declare this building and all accessory structures on this property dangerous; 2) order the property repaired or demolished by December 13, 2012 by the owner or equity owner at their own risk; 3) order the Building Inspector to cause the repair or demolition of the structures if not completed by the owner within 10 days of the date established by City Council; and 4) order the City Manager, with the assistance of the City Solicitor, to cause the cost of repairs or demolition to be charged against the land on which the building exists as a municipal lien, or cause such cost to be added to the tax duplicate as an assessment, or to be levied as a special tax, or to be recovered in a suit at law against the owner. (City Clerk’s Office Note: The action form presented indicated a date of December 13, 2012; however, staff amended their recommendation to order the property repaired or demolished by January 13, 2013 to provide the VA time to make necessary repairs.) In response to Mr. Lynn, Mrs. Townshend indicated that she did not have a contact person at the VA. Mrs. Williams explained that the most effective way to obtain such a contact was through the City’s Congressional Delegation, so that they are provided notice regarding the demolition. Mrs. Townshend assured members that staff had notified all lien holders; therefore, the VA would probably have been made aware of the demolition through disclosure. Mr. Anderson suggested providing 90 days for the necessary repairs to be made rather than 30 or 60 days. Mr. Lynn noted that the property continued to be a problem for his constituents who have kept him apprised of the progress made with the property in the 120 days since its first presentation to Council. He advised members that although some cosmetic changes had been made to the property, there had been no substantive changes. He stated that the property continued to be infested with mold and mosquitos (during the season), lawless individuals had been hiding there, wild animals had been living in and on the property, etc. Mr. Lynn reminded members that during Council’s consideration of this matter on June 25, 2012, the bank had indicated that appropriate action would be taken. Noting that they had not taken such action and that the property remained dangerous, he felt that members should approve staff’s recommendation with a deadline of December 13, 2012 for the property to be repaired or demolished. Mr. Lynn moved for approval of staff’s recommendation regarding the property located at 488 North East Avenue, as follows: 1) declare this building and all accessory structures on this property dangerous; 2) order the property repaired or demolished by December 13, 2012 by the owner or equity owner at their own risk; 3) order the Building Inspector to cause the repair or demolition of

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 13, 2012 PAGE 6 the structures if not completed by the owner within 10 days of the date established by City Council; and 4) order the City Manager, with the assistance of the City Solicitor, to cause the cost of repairs or demolition to be charged against the land on which the building exists as a municipal lien, or cause such cost to be added to the tax duplicate as an assessment, or to be levied as a special tax, or to be recovered in a suit at law against the owner. The motion was seconded by Mr. Perza. Mr. Anderson felt that Council should provide the VA additional time to take action and suggested that staff’s amended date of January 13, 2013 be approved. Mr. Anderson moved to amend the motion to provide a repair or demolition date of January 13, 2013. The motion failed for the lack of a second. Concurring with Mr. Perza, Mr. Lynn reminded members that during the public hearing on June 25th, the attorney for the bank had promised that the necessary repairs would be made. As a result, Council provided them 120 days to complete the repairs. He noted that the bank purchased the property at Sheriff’s sale and then immediately conveyed it to another party, delaying any action and putting the City’s residents in danger. Mr. Anderson stated that the nature of the amendment was to follow staff’s recommendation. He explained that staff would then have the authority to take any necessary action and that the matter would not be presented to Council for any further consideration. On a call for the question, the motion to approve staff’s recommendation regarding the property located at 488 North East Avenue, as follows: 1) declare this building and all accessory structures on this property dangerous; 2) order the property repaired or demolished by December 13, 2012 by the owner or equity owner at their own risk; 3) order the Building Inspector to cause the repair or demolition of the structures if not completed by the owner within 10 days of the date established by City Council; and 4) order the City Manager, with the assistance of the City Solicitor, to cause the cost of repairs or demolition to be charged against the land on which the building exists as a municipal lien, or cause such cost to be added to the tax duplicate as an assessment, or to be levied as a special tax, or to be recovered in a suit at law against the owner, was carried by a roll call vote of six (6) yes (Lynn, Perza, Williams, Hare, Hutchison, and Leary), one (1) no (Anderson), and one (1) absent (Bonar). PUBLIC HEARING - VIOLATION OF THE DANGEROUS BUILDING ORDINANCE - 628 NORTH WEST STREET - OWNED BY MARINA LAIRD A public hearing was duly advertised for this time and place to consider a violation of the Dangerous Building Ordinance at 628 North West Street, owned by Marina Laird (c/o Marina Laird Valentine). Mrs. Ann Marie Townshend, Director of Planning and Community Development, stated that the property consisted of a split-level, wood-framed, single-family home. On August 19, 2009, the metering department for the City disconnected the water to the home due to the failure of the owner to upgrade the current meter to an electronic radio-read water meter. On May 5, 2011, the home was declared unfit for human habitation due to no water service and the electric service was disconnected. She advised members that since then the home had been registered as a vacant

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 13, 2012 PAGE 7 building with 1st and 2nd year registration fees due. Currently, the structure was still unoccupied, with no active utility services, and in a serious state of disrepair, with large amounts of debris, garbage, and personal effects filling the interior of the home. Mrs. Townshend provided a chronological history and presentation on the conditions of the house located at 628 North West Street (Exhibit #2). Staff recommended that City Council: 1) declare this building and all accessory structures on this property dangerous; 2) order the property repaired or demolished by December 13, 2012 by the owner or equity owner at their own risk: 3) order the Building Inspector to cause the repair or demolition of the structures if not completed by the owner within 10 days of the date established by City Council; and 4) order the City Manager, with the assistance of the City Solicitor, to cause the cost of repairs or demolition to be charged against the land on which the building exists as a municipal lien, or cause such cost to be added to the tax duplicate as an assessment, or to be levied as a special tax, or to be recovered in a suit at law against the owner. Council President Leary declared the public hearing open. Ms. Lisa Valentine Phillips, 57 Hardwood Drive, stated that the property was owned by her mother, (who had passed away 16 years ago) and her father. She believed that the property became overwhelming for her father to care for and that many of the code violations were not known by the children. She stated that the home was being transferred over to her and her siblings and assured members that the concerns would be addressed; however, she stated that they would need additional time to have them completed. Responding to Mr. Hutchison, Ms. Phillips felt that the necessary repairs could be accomplished within 90 days. She advised members that they had already started cleaning up the property and that the upstairs had been completed, with the exception of the furniture and possessions. She stated that it was hoped that the family would save on costs by doing a lot of the work themselves. In response to Mr. Perza, Ms. Phillips stated that the family had talked with a contractor regarding the repairs necessary to the siding and steps, and that the costs should be minimal. Responding to Mrs. Williams, Mrs. Townshend indicated that she felt the property was not compromised; however, she reiterated that staff had not been able to inspect the interior to make such a determination. There being no one else wishing to speak, Council President Leary declared the public hearing closed. Mr. Hare moved to approve staff’s recommendation regarding the property located at 628 North West Street, as follows: 1) declare this building and all accessory structures on this property dangerous; 2) order the property repaired or demolished by December 13, 2012 by the owner or equity owner at their own risk: 3) order the Building Inspector to cause the repair or demolition of the structures if not completed by the owner within 10 days of the date established by City Council; and 4) order the City Manager, with the assistance of the City

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 13, 2012 PAGE 8 Solicitor, to cause the cost of repairs or demolition to be charged against the land on which the building exists as a municipal lien, or cause such cost to be added to the tax duplicate as an assessment, or to be levied as a special tax, or to be recovered in a suit at law against the owner, with the stipulation that the property owner be granted a 90-day extension to make the necessary repairs. The motion was seconded by Mrs. Williams and carried by a roll call vote of six (6) yes (Lynn, Perza, Williams, Hare, Hutchison, and Leary), one (1) abstention (Anderson), and one (1) absent (Bonar). Mr. Anderson abstained due to concern that the property had not reached a level for condemnation. PUBLIC HEARING - VIOLATION OF THE DANGEROUS BUILDING ORDINANCE - 312-314 WEST DIVISION STREET - OWNED BY TARUNA, LLC A public hearing was duly advertised for this time and place to consider a violation of the Dangerous Building Ordinance at 312-314 West Division Street, owned by Taruna, LLC. Mrs. Ann Marie Townshend, Director of Planning and Community Development, stated that the property consisted of a three (3) story, wood-framed duplex. On April 4, 2007, the building was condemned and declared unsafe for human occupancy due to numerous code violations found within the structure and the illegal use that was occurring at the time. She advised members that the previous owner had created an illegal passageway between the two (2) structures and was using one (1) side as a church and the other as apartments. She stated that the property had been vacant with no active utility service since December 1, 2010, and that there had been no power in some of the smaller units since December 2005. Currently, the structure was vacant, with no active utility services, and in a serious state of disrepair. Mrs. Townshend provided a chronological history and presentation on the conditions of the house located at 312-314 West Division Street (Exhibit #3). Staff recommended that City Council: 1) declare this building and all accessory structures on this property dangerous; 2) order the property repaired or demolished by December 13, 2012 by the owner or equity owner at their own risk; 3) order the Building Inspector to cause the repair or demolition of the structures if not completed by the owner within 10 days of the date established by City Council; 4) order the City Manager, with the assistance of the City Solicitor, to cause the cost of repairs or demolition to be charged against the land on which the building exists as a municipal lien, or cause such cost to be added to the tax duplicate as an assessment, or to be levied as a special tax, or to be recovered in a suit at law against the owner. Mrs. Townshend stated that on November 1, 2012, she received a request from the property owner for additional time to take action regarding this property, explaining that his wife had been sick and he had just had surgery. When this request was received, she stated that the item had already been scheduled for a public hearing at this time. Responding to Mrs. Williams, Mrs. Townshend indicated that the City did not have a structural report for the property and explained that, due to the amount of deterioration, staff would require a structural evaluation from a structural engineer. In response to Council President Leary, Mrs. Townshend stated that approximately three (3) years ago, staff met with the current property owner regarding the possibility of using the property for

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 13, 2012 PAGE 9 commercial purposes. Due to the required renovations and zoning issues, which were significant, no further discussion had taken place since that time. Council President Leary declared the public hearing open. Mr. Utpal Turakhia, 258 Harvest Road Trail, stated that he purchased the property in 2010 and was trying to make the necessary repairs. Unfortunately, his wife had been sick and he had been short- handed with his business, which had prevented him from having the necessary time to tend to this matter. Noting that several of the violations were issued in 2007, he questioned if the previous owner would be responsible for those violations. Responding, Council President Leary indicated that the Building Inspector noted that the situation regarding the property would have been known during the time of purchase. Mr. Turakhia indicated that he had been in contact with a contractor to assist with repairs; however, he has had recent deaths in the family. There being no one else wishing to speak, Council President Leary declared the public hearing closed. Responding to Mr. Hare, Mrs. Townshend stated that she, along with the Fire Marshal, Building Inspector, and a member of the Planning Department staff met with the current owner in 2010, at which time he was made aware of the action that would be necessary, including architectural drawings and information regarding a contractor to perform the work. She stated that there had been no further contact since that time. In response to Mrs. Williams, Mrs. Townshend explained that she had concerns about the building due to its age and the deterioration of the structure that has occurred for the past several years. Mrs. Williams questioned the ability of a person to purchase a building that may not be structurally sound. Responding, Mr. Perza stated that a buyer could purchase property with his own money and without requiring any type of inspection. However, if a lender is involved, such an inspection would be required. Mrs. Williams moved that the structure located at 312-314 West Division Street be declared a dangerous building and subject to demolition, as recommended by staff, seconded by Mr. Perza. The motion failed by a roll call vote of four (4) yes (Perza, Williams, Hutchison, and Leary), three (3) no (Anderson, Lynn, and Hare) and one (1) absent (Bonar). Mr. Lynn moved to approve staff’s recommendation regarding the property located at 312-314 West Division Street, as follows: 1) declare this building and all accessory structures on this property dangerous; 2) order the property repaired or demolished by December 13, 2012 by the owner or equity owner at their own risk; 3) order the Building Inspector to cause the repair or demolition of the structures if not completed by the owner within 10 days of the date established by City Council; 4) order the City Manager, with the assistance of the City Solicitor, to cause the cost of repairs or demolition to be charged against the land on which the building exists as a municipal lien, or cause such cost to be added to the tax duplicate as an assessment, or to be levied as a special tax, or to be recovered in a suit at law against the owner, with the stipulation that the property owner be granted a 90-day extension to make the

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 13, 2012 PAGE 10 necessary repairs. The motion was seconded by Mr. Anderson and carried by a roll call vote of six (6) yes (Anderson, Lynn, Perza, Williams, Hare, and Leary), one (1) no (Hutchison), and one (1) absent (Bonar). PUBLIC HEARING - VIOLATION OF THE DANGEROUS BUILDING ORDINANCE - 316 WEST DIVISION STREET - OWNED BY JOE W. BURDEN SR. A public hearing was duly advertised for this time and place to consider a violation of the Dangerous Building Ordinance at 316 West Division Street, owned by Joe W. Burden Sr. Mrs. Ann Marie Townshend, Director of Planning and Community Development, stated that the property consists of a two (2) story, wood-framed, single-family home. On January 13, 2010, a housing inspection was conducted on the structure with numerous code violations found. Some of the violations were corrected by the owner, but utilities were disconnected on April 7, 2010 and no further inspections had occurred. Since then, the home had been registered as a vacant building, with second year registration fees due, and the rental license had been suspended. Currently, the structure was still unoccupied, with no active utility services and in a serious state of disrepair. Mrs. Townshend provided a chronological history and presentation on the conditions of the house located at 316 West Division Street (Exhibit #4). Staff recommended that City Council: 1) declare this building and all accessory structures on this property dangerous; 2) order the property repaired or demolished by December 13, 2012 by the owner or equity owner at their own risk; 3) order the Building Inspector to cause the repair or demolition of the structures if not completed by the owner within 10 days of the date established by City Council; 4) order the City Manager, with the assistance of the City Solicitor, to cause the cost of repairs or demolition to be charged against the land on which the building exists as a municipal lien, or cause such cost to be added to the tax duplicate as an assessment, or to be levied as a special tax, or to be recovered in a suit at law against the owner. In response to Mr. Perza, Mrs. Townshend stated that although there had been interaction with the property owner regarding other properties and minor repairs, to her knowledge, there had been no interaction specifically regarding the property at 316 West Division Street. Council President Leary declared the public hearing open. Mr. Joe Burden Sr., 1422 McKee Road, advised members that he had visited the City’s Inspections Department on November 5, 2012 and advised staff that all repairs had been made to the property. An inspector had visited the property and indicated that the exterior repairs had been made; however, he would need to also inspect the interior. Mr. Burden stated that he attempted to have the electric service restored and was advised that since approximately $7,000 was due in outstanding property taxes, the City could not restore electric service. Mr. Burden indicated that in January, he had paid $27,000 in back taxes and that in September he paid almost $16,000 in taxes. Due to the economy, he stated that his tenants were unable to pay rent, which had resulted in his being late for tax payments.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 13, 2012 PAGE 11 Responding to Mr. Perza, Mrs. Townshend explained that the electric service cannot be restored if there are any taxes due on any property (Clean Hands Ordinance) and that an interior inspection could not be done without running water and electricity. In response to Mr. Lynn, Mrs. Townshend stated her belief that there were delinquent taxes on all properties owned by Mr. Burden, explaining that the City’s delinquent tax list contained multiple pages of properties owned by Mr. Burden. Disagreeing, Mr. Burden stated that all taxes for all the houses he owns have been paid and the only outstanding taxes due were for his land. There being no one else wishing to speak, Council President Leary declared the public hearing closed. In response to Mr. Perza, Mrs. Townshend stated that 316 West Division Street was not listed on the delinquent tax roll; however, 320 West Division Street was listed. Mr. Anderson felt that the recent amendments to the Clean Hands Ordinance would allow for utility service to be temporarily restored to allow for repairs and inspections. Mr. Anderson moved to lay the matter on the table. The motion failed due to the lack of a second. Mr. Hare moved to approve staff’s recommendation regarding the property located at 316 West Division Street, as follows: 1) declare this building and all accessory structures on this property dangerous; 2) order the property repaired or demolished by December 13, 2012 by the owner or equity owner at their own risk; 3) order the Building Inspector to cause the repair or demolition of the structures if not completed by the owner within 10 days of the date established by City Council; 4) order the City Manager, with the assistance of the City Solicitor, to cause the cost of repairs or demolition to be charged against the land on which the building exists as a municipal lien, or cause such cost to be added to the tax duplicate as an assessment, or to be levied as a special tax, or to be recovered in a suit at law against the owner. The motion was seconded by Mrs. Williams and carried by a roll call vote of five (5) yes (Perza, Williams, Hare, Hutchison, and Leary), two (2) no (Anderson and Lynn) and one (1) absent (Bonar). PUBLIC HEARING - VIOLATION OF THE DANGEROUS BUILDING ORDINANCE - 320 WEST DIVISION STREET - OWNED BY JOE W. BURDEN SR. A public hearing was duly advertised for this time and place to consider a violation of the Dangerous Building Ordinance at 320 West Division Street, owned by Joe W. Burden Sr. Mrs. Ann Marie Townshend, Director of Planning and Community Development, stated that the property consisted of a two (2) story, wood-framed, single-family home that was converted at some point into two (2) apartments. On November 28, 2010 a housing inspection was conducted within the apartment units with numerous code violations found. Some of the violations were corrected by the owner, but no further inspections occurred after December 1, 2010. Since then, the home had been registered as a vacant building with first year registration fees due, and the rental license was suspended on

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 13, 2012 PAGE 12 March 3, 2011. Currently the structure was still unoccupied, with no active utility services, and in a serious state of disrepair. Mrs. Townshend provided a chronological history and presentation on the conditions of the house located at 320 West Division Street (Exhibit #5). Staff recommended that City Council: 1) declare this building and all accessory structures on this property dangerous; 2) order the property repaired or demolished by December 13, 2012 by the owner or equity owner at their own risk; 3) order the Building Inspector to cause the repair or demolition of the structures if not completed by the owner within 10 days of the date established by City Council; 4) order the City Manager, with the assistance of the City Solicitor, to cause the cost of repairs or demolition to be charged against the land on which the building exists as a municipal lien, or cause such cost to be added to the tax duplicate as an assessment, or to be levied as a special tax, or to be recovered in a suit at law against the owner. Responding to Mrs. Williams, Mrs. Townshend stated that there were numerous interior violations and that the rental permit was not issued due to overall dilapidation. Council President Leary declared the public hearing open. Mr. Joe Burden, 1422 McKee Road, advised members that the City inspector had conducted an inspection on the interior of the property and, although he had indicated that it was in good shape, he could not finalize the inspection since utility service was necessary to complete the inspection. He stated that the electricity could not be turned on due to the outstanding taxes. However, Mr. Burden stated that he paid approximately $16,000 in taxes in September, and explained that his tenants were not paying him rent due to the economy. There being no one else wishing to speak, Council President Leary declared the public hearing closed. Mr. Perza moved that the structure located at 320 West Division Street be declared a dangerous building and subject to demolition, as recommended by staff, seconded by Mrs. Williams. Mr. Anderson stated that everyone knew that these properties were not dangerous and relayed concern with the City utilizing taxpayers’ money to demolish affordable housing that was desperately needed. Disagreeing, Mr. Hare stated that he was not aware of the condition of this house and that staff had the knowledge to make such a determination and report their findings to Council. He also felt that if the City inspector had determined that the necessary repairs were made to the property, it would have been included in the report. In addition, he felt that Council should follow the ordinances that they pass, including the Clean Hands Ordinance. Responding to Mr. Lynn, Mrs. Townshend stated that there are fire concerns with any vacant building, which is one (1) of the reasons staff is vigilant in taking the appropriate action involving vacant buildings. Specifically, she stated her understanding that there were electrical concerns that required electrical inspection.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 13, 2012 PAGE 13 On a call for the question, the motion to approve staff’s recommendation regarding the property located at 320 West Division Street, as follows: 1) declare this building and all accessory structures on this property dangerous; 2) order the property repaired or demolished by December 13, 2012 by the owner or equity owner at their own risk; 3) order the Building Inspector to cause the repair or demolition of the structures if not completed by the owner within 10 days of the date established by City Council; 4) order the City Manager, with the assistance of the City Solicitor, to cause the cost of repairs or demolition to be charged against the land on which the building exists as a municipal lien, or cause such cost to be added to the tax duplicate as an assessment, or to be levied as a special tax, or to be recovered in a suit at law against the owner, was carried by a vote of five (5) yes (Perza, Williams, Hare, Hutchison, and Leary), two (2) no (Anderson and Lynn) and one (1) absent (Bonar). SAFETY ADVISORY AND TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE REPORT - OCTOBER 24, 2012 The Safety Advisory and Transportation Committee met on October 24, 2012 with Chairman Hutchison presiding. Proposed Resolution No. 2012-14 - Designating a Redevelopment Area on Properties Bounded by U.S. Route 13 (North DuPont Highway) on the East, Kings Highway on the North and West, and Delaware Route 8 (East Division Street) on the South Mrs. Ann Marie Townshend, Director of Planning and Community Development, advised members that Delaware Department of Transportation (DelDOT) Standards and Regulations for Subdivision Streets and State Highway Access include level of service (LOS) criteria. She explained that DelDOT has limited flexibility to relax its LOS standards unless an area is designated as a redevelopment area. Mrs. Townshend noted that in the development process, the developer is typically responsible for the transportation upgrades necessary to support the proposed development project and must bring the road segment or intersection up to an acceptable level of service. She indicated that this becomes a challenge in highly developed urban areas as upgrades may involve property acquisition or condemnation, which can be costly enough to make a project economically infeasible. Mrs. Townshend explained that the property located in the area bound by U.S. Route 13 on the east, Kings Highway on the north and west, and Delaware Route 8 on the south was in an area where current transportation challenges create an impediment to redevelopment without flexibility of the LOS standard. Although the language in the City’s Comprehensive Plan supports redevelopment of underutilized sites along the Route 13 corridor, after discussing this matter with DelDOT, it was determined that the Comprehensive Plan was not specific enough to allow DelDOT to require only that the current LOS be maintained. Mrs. Townshend reviewed Proposed Resolution No. 2012-14, designating a redevelopment area on Properties Bounded by U.S. Route 13 (North DuPont Highway) on the East, Kings Highway on the North and West, and Delaware Route 8 (East Division Street) on the South. She stated that the proposed Resolution would allow DelDOT to require the developer to contribute only a portion of the cost of improvement that is proportional to the traffic generated by the proposed development rather than making costly upgrades to the intersection that would make the project infeasible.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 13, 2012 PAGE 14 Mrs. Townshend assured members that the Proposed Resolution had been reviewed by DelDOT and no concerns were indicated; however, DelDOT staff forwarded the Resolution to the Deputy Attorney General for review before providing their approval. After speaking with representatives of DelDOT, she stated that it was suggested that the Proposed Resolution be presented to the Committee for their review and recommendation in hopes that approval from the Deputy Attorney General would be received prior to submission to City Council on November 13, 2012. Mrs. Townshend stated that if the approval were not received by that date, the matter would be removed from the Consent Agenda. At the request of Mr. Hutchison, Mrs. Townshend assured members that the proposed Resolution would be forwarded to the City Solicitor’s Office for review prior to its consideration by City Council. The Committee recommended adoption of Resolution No. 2012-14, provided that approval of the Resolution was received from the Deputy Attorney General and City Solicitor. By consent agenda, Mr. Hare moved for approval of the Committee’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Hutchison and by a unanimous roll call vote (Bonar absent), Council adopted Resolution No. 2012-14, as follows: A RESOLUTION DESIGNATING A REDEVELOPMENT AREA ON PROPERTIES BOUNDED BY U.S. ROUTE 13 (NORTH DUPONT HIGHWAY) ON THE EAST, KINGS HIGHWAY ON THE NORTH AND WEST, AND DELAWARE ROUTE 8 (EAST DIVISION STREET) ON THE SOUTH WHEREAS, the City of Dover 2008 Comprehensive Plan, as amended, encourages redevelopment along the U.S. Route 13 corridor; and WHEREAS, a number of intersections along the U.S. Route 13 corridor fail to meet the Level of Service Standards required by the State of Delaware, and the costs of modifying such intersections can cause redevelopment of certain properties to be financially infeasible; and WHEREAS, economic growth, prosperity and redevelopment are identified priorities of the City of Dover, which wishes to work with the development community and the Delaware Department of Transportation to promote redevelopment while preserving and enhancing the transportation network. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER 1. Designates the area bounded by U.S. Route 13 (North DuPont Highway) on the east, Kings Highway on the north and west, and Delaware Route 8 (East Division Street) on the south as a redevelopment area, and requests that the Delaware Department of Transportation allow for development to proceed without requiring the developer to make all of the necessary improvements but rather requiring the developer to contribute a portion of the costs to be set

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 13, 2012 PAGE 15 aside for current and future improvements that is proportional to the traffic generated by the proposed development; and 2. Directs staff to work with the Delaware Department of Transportation and the Dover/Kent County Metropolitan Planning Organization to plan for and prioritize the transportation system improvements needed to facilitate redevelopment. ADOPTED: NOVEMBER 13, 2012 Review of Rear Access Waiver for Leander Lakes Apartments Members considered a request for a waiver of the emergency rear access requirements for the Leander Lakes Apartments. Mrs. Ann Marie Townshend, Director of Planning and Community Development, reviewed the site plan provided to members and explained that the subject property consists of one (1) parcel of land totaling 28.67+/- acres. The subject property is zoned RM-1 (Medium Density Residence Zone) and is subject to the COZ-1 (Corridor Overlay Zone). This property is located on the south side of Forrest Avenue west of Dover High Drive and the property of Dover High School and east of Artis Drive. The owner of record is Leander Lakes, LLC (Tax Parcel: ED-05-075.00-01-05.01-000). Mrs. Townshend advised members that the Site Plan proposes 240 apartment dwelling units in a series of three (3) story apartment buildings. The development will consist of a total of ten (10) apartment buildings, a clubhouse, and residual land to be used for stormwater management, the entry road, and open space. The entrances leading into the apartment complex site are off Dover High Drive, which connects to Forrest Avenue. The continuation of Dover High Drive is currently under construction and will connect to Tribbitt Street in the Cannon Mill subdivision. Noting the close proximity to the new Dover High School, Mrs. Townshend indicated that one (1) of the requirements of the Planning Commission was for the developers to work together to execute a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA), which has been accomplished. She stated that the MOA specifies which portions of the roadway would be built by the developers of Dover High School and which would be the responsibility of the builders for Leander Lakes Apartments. Mrs. Townshend reminded members that the Planning Commission had originally granted conditional Site Plan approval (S-09-13) for a 240-unit apartment complex at their meeting in August 2009. Since construction did not commence, the plan expired on August 31, 2012. A Record Plan was previously recorded to subdivide the subject property from the Destiny Christian Church parcel. A Record Plan also recorded the contribution of forty (40) feet of property by Leander Lakes, LLC to create the right-of-way for Dover High Drive. She advised members that the request for a waiver to eliminate the emergency rear access requirement was part of this previous application and that City Council granted the waiver request at their meeting of September 14, 2009. In accordance with Article 5 §17.5(a) of the Zoning Ordinance, Mrs. Townshend indicated that a 16-foot alley or an 18-foot secondary fire lane and an 18-foot subgrade emergency access lane would be required as emergency access to the rear building areas for two (2) and three (3) story apartment buildings. She noted that the applicant was requesting a waiver of these requirements. She stated that the existing circulation layout provides a 24-foot fire lane access across the front side of each

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 13, 2012 PAGE 16 building and that the buildings will contain sprinkler systems. For informational purposes, Mrs. Townshend advised members that since waivers of this requirement are granted frequently, staff was considering the removal of this section from the Zoning Ordinance. After review by the Fire Marshal, staff felt confident that the necessary fire protection was provided through fire lane coverage and sprinkler systems; however, it was necessary to conduct the waiver process because rear access was a current Code requirement. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the waiver for the elimination of the emergency rear access. Members were provided a summary of the requested waiver as follows: Zoning Ordinance Required Proposed Waiver Emergency Rear Access 16 ft. alley or 18 ft. None Elimination of the for Two-Three story secondary fire lane Required alleys/ apartment buildings and an 18 ft. subgrade Secondary fire lanes Emergency access lane Responding to Mr. Davis, Mrs. Townshend assured members that City Staff had been meeting with the Delaware Department of Transportation (DelDOT), explaining the need for the Route 8/Hazlettville Road connection project to be completed sooner than originally planned. She advised members that staff was expecting an application for development for property located at the corner of Dover High Drive and Route 8. As a result, she stated that she had requested a meeting with all project engineers involved to assure that the infrastructure being planned would tie in together. Mrs. Townshend indicated that Calvary Baptist Church, which occupies the adjacent property to the west, has placed their development plans on hold; however, they plan to develop the property as a church/church school site. Mrs. Townshend further explained that the City has required cross access easements to the Destiny Christian Center property, the Dover High School property, and other adjacent properties. In response to Mr. Hutchison, Mrs. Townshend indicated her understanding that the developers hope to begin construction within a year. The Committee recommended approval of a waiver of the Zoning Code requirement for emergency rear access for Leander Lakes Apartments, as recommended by the Planning Commission. By consent agenda, Mr. Hare moved for approval of the Committee’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Hutchison and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Bonar absent). Creation of Bicycle and Pedestrian Committee Mrs. Ann Marie Townshend, Director of Planning and Community Development, reminded members that the 2008 City of Dover Comprehensive Plan included a recommendation for the formation of a Bicycle/Pedestrian Advisory Group made up of bicyclists, pedestrians, DelDOT staff, MPO staff, and City staff to begin identifying gaps in the pedestrian and bicycle network. She indicated that in September 2011, the Dover Kent County Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) approved the Kent County Regional Bicycle Plan, which aims to create an effective, safe bicycle system in central Delaware. It shows where there are bicycle trails, lanes, and similar

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 13, 2012 PAGE 17 facilities in central Delaware and where there are gaps in such a service. This plan identifies a number of priorities in the City of Dover. She explained that the proposed Bicycle and Pedestrian Committee would work with the City, the Delaware Department of Transportation (DelDOT) and the Dover/Kent County MPO to prioritize projects for implementation and to promote safe opportunities for bicycling, walking, and jogging in the City of Dover. Mrs. Townshend also explained that the creation of this Committee would provide the City a mechanism for regular communication with the cycling and pedestrian community, which would help to improve the quality of life in the City, help the City to achieve a Bicycle Friendly Community designation, and put the City in a positive position to receive funding through the State Trails and Pathways Initiative. Staff recommended the creation of a Bicycle and Pedestrian Committee consisting of five (5) City residents who are active pedestrians and cyclists selected by the Chair of the Safety Advisory and Transportation Committee, with participation from City departments, DelDOT, and the Dover/Kent County MPO. In response to Mr. Hutchison, Mrs. Townshend stated that two (2) individuals had indicated an interest in serving the City in this capacity and another individual who may also wish to serve approached her at a Bike Summit. She suggested that recommendations be provided for consideration and that she meet with the Committee Chair prior to the end of the year to finalize the selection of members. Mr. Keller questioned whether the City would be required to maintain the pathway, including snow removal. Mrs. Townshend expressed her opinion that the City would be responsible for snow removal but that this would be a lower priority than snow removal from City streets. She acknowledged the importance of pathway maintenance, noting that an asphalt pathway on North Street that travels to Schutte Park has not been actively maintained and, as a result, grass is protruding and damaging the asphalt. She stated that the proposed committee would be discussing these types of issues. The Committee recommended the creation of a Bicycle and Pedestrian Committee as recommended by staff, and that staff work with the Committee Chair to develop a list of members to be considered for appointment to this Committee. By consent agenda, Mr. Hare moved for approval of the Committee’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Hutchison and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Bonar absent). By consent agenda, Mr. Hare moved for acceptance of the Safety Advisory and Transportation Committee Report, seconded by Mr. Hutchison and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Bonar absent).

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 13, 2012 PAGE 18 MONTHLY REPORTS - SEPTEMBER 2012 By motion of Mr. Hare, seconded by Mr. Hutchison, the following monthly reports were accepted by consent agenda: Budget Chief of Police City Assessor City Manager City Planner Dover Fire Department Economic Development Office QUARTERLY REVIEW OF UTILITY RELATED CAPITAL INVESTMENT PLAN (CIP) (July, August, and September) Mrs. Donna Mitchell, Controller/Treasurer, submitted the Quarterly Review of the Utility Related Capital Investment Plan (CIP) for July, August, and September. By consent agenda, Mr. Hare moved for acceptance of the Quarterly Review of the Utility Related Capital Investment Plan (CIP) for July, August, and September. The motion was seconded by Mr. Hutchison and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Bonar absent). CURFEW ORDINANCE SIX-MONTH REPORT BY POLICE CHIEF In accordance with Section 59-9(a) of the Dover Code, Police Chief Hosfelt submitted a Curfew Ordinance Six-Month Report. By consent agenda, Mr. Hare moved for acceptance of the Curfew Ordinance Six-Month Report by Police Chief Hosfelt, seconded by Mr. Hutchison and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Bonar absent). COUNCIL AND COMMITTEE MEETINGS - HOLIDAY SCHEDULE/DECEMBER 24, 2012 SPECIAL HOLIDAY Council President Leary noted that as Council has done in the past, due to the holiday season, it was recommended that the Utility and Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee Meetings and the Council Meeting scheduled for December 24th be cancelled, as well as the Safety Advisory and Transportation Committee meeting scheduled for December 26th. He assured members that if the need arose, Special Meetings would be called. Additionally, Council President Leary noted that Christmas would fall on a Tuesday this year; therefore, it was recommended that consideration be given to recognizing Monday, December 24, 2012 as a special holiday declared by City Council for City employees. Mr. Hare moved for approval of the Holiday Schedule for the Council and Committee Meetings, as presented by Council President Leary, and that Monday, December 24th be declared a Special Holiday for City employees. The motion was seconded by Mrs. Williams.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 13, 2012 PAGE 19 Responding to Mr. Lynn, Mrs. Donna Mitchell, Controller/Treasurer, stated her recollection that the costs associated with providing a holiday for employees was approximately $1,400 - $1,900. On a call for the question, the motion to approve the Holiday Schedule for the Council and Committee Meetings, as presented by Council President Leary, and that Monday, December 24th be declared a Special Holiday for City employees carried by a roll call vote of five (5) yes (Lynn, Williams, Hare, Hutchison, and Leary), two (2) no (Anderson and Perza), and one (1) absent (Bonar). FINAL READING - PROPOSED ORDINANCE #2012-22 WITH LF&A-1 AMENDING CHAPTER 114 - VEGETATION, ARTICLE II - WEEDS (COLLECTION OF GRASS CUTTING FEES) The First Reading of the following proposed ordinance was accomplished during the Council Meeting of October 22, 2012. Mr. Hutchison moved that the Final Reading of the proposed ordinance be acknowledged by title only, seconded by Mr. Hare and unanimously carried. Mrs. Ann Marie Townshend reminded members that the proposed ordinance amendment would add unpaid fines for grass cutting to the tax duplicate to be invoiced as part of the annual property tax bill and collected as part of the city property tax collection process and holds the violator responsible for collection costs and attorney’s fees. Responding to Mr. Lynn, Mrs. Townshend stated that according to the Deputy City Solicitor, the only items that can be included on a tax bill are those items that allow for a lien to be placed in accordance with State Statute (Title 25), which currently only allows exterior repairs and remediation to a property. Therefore, the City could not include most of the City’s code enforcement fines on the tax bills. Mr. Hare moved for approval of the Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee’s Amendment to Ordinance #2012-22, seconded by Mr. Lynn and unanimously carried. Mr. Hare moved for adoption of the proposed ordinance, as amended, seconded by Mr. Lynn and, by a unanimous roll call vote (Bonar absent), Council adopted Ordinance #2012-22, as follows: BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: That Chapter 114 - Vegetation, Article II - Weeds, Section 114-33 - Failure to Maintain Proper Height; Abatement by City; Costs and Lien, be amended to read as follows: Sec. 114-33. - Failure to maintain proper height; abatement by city; costs and lien.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 13, 2012 PAGE 20 (a) Summons; action by city. In the event that any owner, occupant or tenant of any premises within the city, or any agent caring for or in charge of the premises, shall permit any grass, weeds, underbrush, deleterious or unhealthful growths or other noxious matter to grow to a height of eight inches or more as prohibited by this article, then the code enforcement officer or fire marshal or his authorized agents shall issue a summons showing a violation of section 114-32, said summons to be served personally or by mail evidenced by certificate of mailing upon the owner, occupant, or tenant of the premises, or any agent caring for or in charge of the premises. The summons shall cite the violation of this article and shall be accompanied by a letter or a copy of the relevant provisions of this article stating what corrective action must be taken and shall state the consequences for failure to take such corrective action. If the violation is not corrected within three days from the date of personal service of the summons or within seven days from the date of mailing of the summons evidenced by certificate of mailing, then the city, at the direction of the code enforcement officer or the fire marshal, may remove the weeds, grass, underbrush, deleterious or other unhealthful growths or other noxious matter growing to a height in excess of eight inches or more in violation of section 114-32 and charge the responsible person as provided for in Appendix F—Fees and Fines for such work that must be done to render the property in compliance with this article. When the owner, occupant, or tenant of any premises, or any agent caring for or in charge of the premises, has received summonses, or been issued a summons evidenced by certificate of mailing, and fails to take corrective action, and the city has corrected the violation in accordance with this subsection, then no further notification shall be necessary for the city to take any further corrective action on any subsequent violations within the following 12-month period starting from the date of the first corrective action by the city. (b) Failure to pay charges. In the event that the owner of record is deemed to be in violation of section 114-32, and in the event that the violation is corrected in compliance with subsection (a) of this section, and if the charges assessed by the city for correcting said deficiency are not paid, then the city, after having corrected the deficiency and violation, shall place its charges and expenses as specified in the municipal lien docket as a lien against said property, and add the charges and expenses as specified to the tax duplicate for the tax year said services were provided by the city and invoiced as part of the annual property tax bill for said property and collected as part of the city property tax collection process. In addition to the methods directed herein, the city solicitor shall be directed to enforce said lien or to collect the charges imposed by the city by any other means that he may deem desirable and most advantageous to the city. The violator shall be responsible for all collection costs and expenses, including attorneys' fees. BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED THAT Section 114-34 - Fines, be amended to read as follows: Sec. 114-34. - Fines. (a) Generally. Any person convicted of a violation of section 114-32, regardless of corrective actions taken, shall be punished for that violation by a fine as provided for in Appendix F—Fees and Fines. Any such fine shall be in addition to any charges or assessments imposed

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 13, 2012 PAGE 21 upon the violator pursuant to section 114-33(a). All fines imposed shall be in accordance with the minimum fine schedule set out in subsection (c) herein. (b) Each day. Every day that a violation of section 114-32 continues shall be considered a separate offense, for which the violator may be tried and convicted without necessity of further notice. (c) Minimums. (1) Any fine assessed pursuant to subsection (a) of this section shall be no less than the minimum amount as provided for in Appendix F—Fees and Fines. (2) In determining the applicable minimum fine, an offense shall be considered a recurring offense only if the defendant has previously pleaded, or been found guilty of causing or permitting the same nuisance at the same location within the past 18 months, or for every day that the violation of section 114-32 continues as per subsection (b) of this section. (d) Lien. Any fines imposed pursuant to subsection (a) of this section which remain unpaid shall: (1) be added to the tax duplicate for the tax year said services were provided by the city and invoiced as part of the annual property tax bill for said property and collected as part of the city property tax collection process, and (2) be placed by the city as specified in the municipal lien docket as a lien against the property on which the violation occurred, and the procedures for enforcement or collection of said lien shall be as set out in section 114-33(b). (e) When not paid. Fines not paid within 14 days of the day the fine was issued, including the day the fine was issued, shall be automatically doubled in amount. COUNCIL MEMBERS ANNOUNCEMENTS Council President Leary announced that the Special Fourth District Election would be held on November 27, 2012 between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. at the Elk’s Lodge #1903 at 200 Saulsbury Road. Mr. Hare commended the City’s Electric Department for the assistance they provided to the residents of New Jersey due to the devastation caused by Hurricane Sandy. (Several members of Council joined in this commendation.) Mr. Lynn congratulated Mrs. Sharon Duca for her recent appointment as Director of Public Works. Mayor Carey relayed appreciation to all employees for the hard work and extra hours provided during and after Hurricane Sandy, as well as those who traveled to New Jersey.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 13, 2012 PAGE 22 Mr. Lynn moved for adjournment, seconded by Mr. Hare and unanimously carried. Meeting Adjourned at 9:20 P.M. TRACI A. McDOWELL CITY CLERK All orders, ordinances, and resolutions adopted by City Council during their Regular Meeting of November 13, 2012, are hereby approved. CARLETON E. CAREY SR. MAYOR /TM/jg S:\AGENDAS-MINUTES-PACKETS\Council-Minutes\2012\11-13-2012 COUNCIL.wpd Exhibits Exhibit #1 - Presentation - Violation of Dangerous Building Ordinance - 488 North East Avenue Exhibit #2 - Presentation - Violation of Dangerous Building Ordinance - 628 North West Street Exhibit #3 - Presentation - Violation of Dangerous Building Ordinance - 312-314 West Division Exhibit #4 - Presentation - Violation of Dangerous Building Ordinance - 316 West Division Street Exhibit #5 - Presentation - Violation of Dangerous Building Ordinance - 320 West Division Street

Exhibit #1 Council Meeting November 13, 2012 Violation of Dangerous Building Ordinance 488 N East Avenue Planning & Inspections Department Dover, Delaware November 13, 2012 Exhibit #1 Council Meeting November 13, 2012

488 North East Avenue Case History  Four code enforcement cases since 2009 (2 minor cases prior to 2009) – Tall grass and weeds – Vacant building  Registered as vacant building by staff in August 2009.  Source of neighbor complaints.

488 North East Avenue Recent Case History  Staff met with contractor on site on 7/3/12.  Permit issued for roof repair on 10/10/12 – Contractor indicates repairs have been done – No inspection on record  Litter and overgrowth removed  Acquired by HSBC Bank at sheriff sale on 11/1/12  Per Wells Fargo VA will own property following confirmation of sale December 2012.

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

Recommended Council Action  Declare this building and all accessory structures on this property dangerous.  Order the property repaired or demolished by December 13, 2012 by the owner or equity owner at their own risk.  Order the Building Inspector to cause the repair or demolition of the structures if not completed by the owner within 10 days of the date established by City Council.  Order the City Manager with the assistance of the City Solicitor to cause the cost of repairs or demolition to be charged against the land on which the building exists as a municipal lien or cause such cost to be added to the tax duplicate as an assessment, or to be levied as a special tax, or to be recovered in a suit at law against the owner.

Exhibit #2 Council Meeting November 13, 2012 Violation of Dangerous Building Ordinance 628 North West Street Planning & Inspections Department Dover, Delaware November 13, 2012 Exhibit #2 Council Meeting November 13, 2012

628 North West Street Case History  30 code enforcement cases since 2002 – Pool demolished by City in late 2010 – Tall grass and weeds – Vacant building  Water disconnected due to inability to access house to install remote read for water meter in August 2009.  Home condemned on May 5, 2011 and electric disconnected.  Source of neighbor complaints.

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

Recommended Council Action  Declare this building and all accessory structures on this property dangerous.  Order the property repaired or demolished by December 13, 2012 by the owner or equity owner at their own risk.  Order the Building Inspector to cause the repair or demolition of the structures if not completed by the owner within 10 days of the date established by City Council.  Order the City Manager with the assistance of the City Solicitor to cause the cost of repairs or demolition to be charged against the land on which the building exists as a municipal lien or cause such cost to be added to the tax duplicate as an assessment, or to be levied as a special tax, or to be recovered in a suit at law against the owner.

Exhibit #3 Council Meeting November 13, 2012 Violation of Dangerous Building Ordinance 312-314 West Division Street Planning & Inspections Department Dover, Delaware November 13, 2012 Exhibit #3 Council Meeting November 13, 2012

312-314 West Division Street Case History  25+ code enforcement cases since 1998 – Tall grass and weeds – Vacant building – Electric termination – Multiple condemnation cases – Overcrowding  Condemned in April 2007.  No active utilities since 2010 – Some units without power since December 2005

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

Recommended Council Action  Declare this building and all accessory structures on this property dangerous.  Order the property repaired or demolished by December 13, 2012 by the owner or equity owner at their own risk.  Order the Building Inspector to cause the repair or demolition of the structures if not completed by the owner within 10 days of the date established by City Council.  Order the City Manager with the assistance of the City Solicitor to cause the cost of repairs or demolition to be charged against the land on which the building exists as a municipal lien or cause such cost to be added to the tax duplicate as an assessment, or to be levied as a special tax, or to be recovered in a suit at law against the owner.

Exhibit #4 Council Meeting November 13, 2012 Violation of Dangerous Building Ordinance 316 West Division Street Planning & Inspections Department Dover, Delaware November 13, 2012 Exhibit #4 Council Meeting November 13, 2012

316 West Division Street Case History  12 code enforcement cases since 1998. – Tall grass and weeds – Vacant building – Housing inspections – Electric service termination  Numerous violations found during inspection on January 13, 2010.  Utilities disconnected on April 7, 2010.  Owner owes delinquent taxes and utilities on multiple properties.

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

Recommended Council Action  Declare this building and all accessory structures on this property dangerous.  Order the property repaired or demolished by December 13, 2012 by the owner or equity owner at their own risk.  Order the Building Inspector to cause the repair or demolition of the structures if not completed by the owner within 10 days of the date established by City Council.  Order the City Manager with the assistance of the City Solicitor to cause the cost of repairs or demolition to be charged against the land on which the building exists as a municipal lien or cause such cost to be added to the tax duplicate as an assessment, or to be levied as a special tax, or to be recovered in a suit at law against the owner.

Exhibit #5 Council Meeting November 13, 2012 Violation of Dangerous Building Ordinance 320 West Division Street Planning & Inspections Department Dover, Delaware November 13, 2012 Exhibit #5 Council Meeting November 13, 2012

320 West Division Street Case History  20 code enforcement cases since 1998. – Tall grass and weeds – Vacant building – Housing inspections – Electric service termination  Numerous violations found during inspection on November 28, 2010.  Rental permit suspended on March 3, 2011.  Owner owes delinquent taxes and utilities on multiple properties

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

Recommended Council Action  Declare this building and all accessory structures on this property dangerous.  Order the property repaired or demolished by December 13, 2012 by the owner or equity owner at their own risk.  Order the Building Inspector to cause the repair or demolition of the structures if not completed by the owner within 10 days of the date established by City Council.  Order the City Manager with the assistance of the City Solicitor to cause the cost of repairs or demolition to be charged against the land on which the building exists as a municipal lien or cause such cost to be added to the tax duplicate as an assessment, or to be levied as a special tax, or to be recovered in a suit at law against the owner.

PREPARED BY: TAX MAP PARCEL NO. City of Dover ED-00-057.02-02-38.00/000 PO Box 475 ED-00-057.02-02-40.00/000 Dover, DE 19903-0475 MAYOR AND COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2012-16 APPROVING THE INCLUSION OF AN AREA WITHIN THE LIMITS OF THE CITY OF DOVER. WHEREAS, the Charter of the City of Dover authorizes Council to extend the boundaries of the said City after a special election of the qualified voters and real estate owners of the territory proposed to be annexed, and WHEREAS, the Mayor and Council of the City of Dover deem it in the best interest of the City of Dover to include an area contiguous to the present City limits, and hereinafter more particularly described within the limits of the City of Dover, and WHEREAS, the Charter of the City of Dover provides that if a majority of the votes cast in an election held in a territory proposed to be annexed shall be in favor of inclusion of that territory within the limits of the City of Dover, the Council may thereupon adopt a resolution annexing said territory and including same within the limits of the City of Dover. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: 1. That the following described area, situated in East Dover Hundred, Kent County, State of Delaware, shall be annexed to and included within the limits of the City of Dover: ED-00-057.02-02-38.00-000 - 110 RUSTIC LANE (TAILILOU, LLC) ALL THAT TRACT PIECE OR PARCEL of land situated in East Dover Hundred, Kent County, State of Delaware, as shown on a survey prepared by Douglas J. Annand, Professional Land Surveyor, dated November 13, 2011. BEGINNING at a set iron bar on the southerly right-of-way line of Rustic Lane, (50' wide), said point being a corner of this property and Tax Map No. ED-05-057.00-01-50.00, said point being distant easterly 519' from the easterly right-of-way line of U.S. Route 13; thence with said southerly right-of-way line of Rustic Lane, 1) N 50°00'00" E a distance of 200.00', to a set iron bar at a corner of Tax Map No. ED-00-057.02-02-40.00; thence with said Tax Map No. ED-00-057.02-02-40.00, 2) S 39°51'44" E, a distance of 245.88', to a set iron bar in line of lands now or formerly of the State of Delaware, (DB. Q 25-190); thence with the State of Delaware and lands now or formerly of Tidewater Utilities, (DB. B 24, PG. 323), 3) S 50°51'13" W, a distance of 198.64', to a set iron bar at a corner of aforesaid Tax Map No. ED-05-057.00-01-50.00; thence with said Tax Map No. ED-05-057.00-01-50.00, 4) N 40°11'13" W, a distance of 242.92', to the point of beginning. Contained within these metes and bounds are 1.118 acres of land more or less.

ANNEXATION RESOLUTION - 110 AND 136 RUSTIC LANE PAGE 2 ED-00-057.02-02-40.00-000 - 136 RUSTIC LANE (TAILILOU, LLC) ALL THAT TRACT PIECE OR PARCEL of land situated in East Dover Hundred, Kent County, State of Delaware, as shown on a survey prepared by Douglas J. Annand, Professional Land Surveyor, dated November 13, 2011. BEGINNING at a set iron bar on the southerly right-of-way line of Rustic Lane, (50’ wide), said point being a corner of this property and Tax Map No. ED-00-057.02-02-38.00, said point being distant easterly 719' from the easterly right-of-way line of U.S. Route 13; thence with said southerly right-of-way line of Rustic Lane, 1) N 50°00'00" E, a distance of 100.00', to a found iron bar at a corner of lands now or formerly of Michael C. Biddle, (DB. 614, PG. 309); thence with said Biddle and lands now or formerly of Clorinda I. Garrett, (DB. K 39, PG. 311), 2) S 39°51'44" E, a distance of 250.50', to a found iron bar in line of lands now or formerly of The State of Delaware, (DB. Q 25, PG. 190), passing over a found iron bar at 146.20’ from the beginning of this line; thence with The State of Delaware, 3) S 52°38'49" W, a distance of 100.10', to a set iron bar at a corner of Tax Map No. ED-00-057.02-02-38.00; thence with said Tax Map No. ED-00-057.02-02-38.00, 4) N 39°51'44" W, a distance of 245.88', to the point of beginning. Contained within these metes and bounds are 24,819 square feet of land more or less. 2. That the above described property shall be annexed into the City of Dover with a zoning classification as set by City Council and in accordance with the zoning map and environs, then in force, effective upon such lands being included within the limits of the City of Dover. 3. That the certified copy of the resolution of annexation, together with a plot of the area annexed, shall be filed for record with the Recorder of Deeds of Kent County. 4. That the effective date of this resolution shall be the 27th day of November, 2012 at 12:01 a.m. ADOPTED: NOVEMBER 26, 2012 S:\ANNEXATIONS\Annex-2012\110 and 136 Rustic Lane\Approval Resolution for Packets.wpd CARLETON E. CAREY MAYOR THOMAS J. LEARY COUNCIL PRESIDENT

PETITION TO ANNEX AND ZONE PROPERTY Before the Dover City Council November 26, 2012 Applicant/Owner: Taililou, LLC 17601 Coastal Highway, Unit 6 Lewes, DE 19958 Location: 110 Rustic Lane Size: 1.118 +/- ac. Tax Parcel: ED-00-057.02-02-38.00-000 Application Date: August 31, 2012 County Zoning: BG (General Business District) Proposed Zoning: C-2A (Limited Central Commercial Zone) Present Use: Residential Proposed Use: Commercial Comprehensive Plan Designation: Category 1 – High Priority Annexation Areas Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation: Mixed Use Applicant/Owner: Taililou, LLC 17601 Coastal Highway, Unit 6 Lewes, DE 19958 Location: 136 Rustic Lane Size: 0.56986 +/- ac. Tax Parcels: ED-00-057.02-02-40.00-000 Application Date: August 31, 2012 County Zoning: RMH (Residential Manufactured Home District) Proposed Zoning: C-2A (Limited Central Commercial Zone) Present Use: Residential Proposed Use: Commercial Comprehensive Plan Designation: Category 1 – High Priority Annexation Areas Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation: Mixed Use Planning Commission Recommendation: Following a public hearing regarding the rezoning request on October 16, 2012 where one member of the public spoke against the request, the Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend in favor of the rezoning as requested. The Planning Commission’s role in annexation requests is to make a recommendation on the zoning of the property, not the annexation itself. File Number: AX-12-01

Report to City Council AX-12-01 Lands of Taililou, LLC 110 & 136 Rustic Lane Page | 2 Surrounding Land Uses: The immediately adjacent properties to the southwest are within the City limits and zoned C-4 (Highway Commercial). This includes the Sonic drive-thru restaurant located on the corner of Rustic Lane and North DuPont Highway/Route 13, and three properties under the same ownership as the properties requested for annexation. The property abutting the subject properties to the rear (south) is zoned IO (Institutional and Office) in the City of Dover and houses the Delaware State Police Headquarters. The unincorporated properties in the vicinity of the subject parcel are zoned RMH (Residential Manufactured Home) and BN (Neighborhood Business) and are residential in use. Comprehensive Plan: The Annexation and Growth Map (Map 13-1: Potential Annexation Areas) contained within the current certified 2008 Comprehensive Plan as amended designates this land as Category #1 – High Priority Annexation Areas thus making these lands desirable for Annexation. Map 13-2: Potential Land Use for Annexation Areas indicates the Mixed Use designation for the properties. The requested zoning is consistent with this designation. Request for C-2A Zoning: The types of permitted uses in the C-2A (Limited Central Commercial Zone) are given Article 3 §14 of the Zoning Ordinance, and include the following: • Convenience retail stores such as drug stores, grocery stores, luncheonettes, variety stores or combinations thereof. • Personal service stores such as, but not limited to, barbershops, beauty parlors, and tailors, provided that where steam pressure is used in clothes pressing, it shall not exceed 60 pounds per square inch. • Service establishments furnishing services other than of a personal nature, but excluding gasoline filling stations and motor vehicle storage, repair, or service. • Residential uses. • Other retail and service establishments, but excluding: o Gasoline filling stations and motor vehicle storage, repair, or service, except that gasoline pumps shall be permitted as an accessory use, subject to conditional use approval by the planning commission pursuant to article 10, section 1. o Wholesaling, warehousing or storage. o The manufacturing, printing, assembling, converting, altering, finishing, cleaning or any other processing of goods on the premises, except as permitted in the C-1 zone. o Excessive traffic generating uses, such as theaters, drive-ins, bowling alleys and other commercial, recreation, restaurants, etc. • Business, professional or governmental offices. • Banks, theaters and restaurants. • Hotels, clubs and places of worship. • Civic institutions.

Report to City Council AX-12-01 Lands of Taililou, LLC 110 & 136 Rustic Lane Page | 3 Recommendation of the Planning Staff and Planning Commission: The requested zoning of C-2A is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and compatible with the surrounding area. The adjacent properties that are under common ownership are zoned C-4 (Highway Commercial); however, the applicant wishes to develop the property as a mix of commercial and residential. This would not be permitted in the C-4 (Highway Commercial) zone; however, it would be permitted in the C-2A (Limited Central Commercial) zone. Staff recommends in favor of the C-2A zoning requested by the applicant and the ultimate development of the site as mixed use. Such development would be subject to site development plan review by the Planning Commission. Staff recommendation was made prior to public testimony on the request. Following a public hearing on the rezoning request on October 16, 2012, the Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend in favor of the C-2A zoning requested by the applicant. An excerpt of the draft minutes of the Planning Commission is provided.

Report to City Council AX-12-01 Lands of Taililou, LLC 110 & 136 Rustic Lane Page | 4 Excerpt from DRAFT Planning Commission Minutes of October 16, 2012: AX-12-01 Lands of Taililou LLC at 110 and 136 Rustic Lane –Public Hearing and Recommendation to City Council on the Rezoning Request associated with the Annexation of two parcels of land totaling 1.68786 +/- acres located at 110 and 136 Rustic Lane. The property at 110 Rustic Lane consists of 1.118 +/- acres is currently zoned BG (General Business District). The property at 136 Rustic Lane consists of 0.56986 +/- acres is currently zoned RMH (Residential Manufactured Home District) in Kent County. The proposed zoning for both properties is C-2A (Limited Central Commercial Zone). The properties are located east of North DuPont Highway. The current annexation category according to Dover’s 2008 Comprehensive Plan is Category 1: High Priority Annexation Areas. The owner of record is Taililou LLC. Addresses: 110 and 136 Rustic Lane. Tax Parcels: ED-00-057.02-02-38.00-000 and ED-00-057-02-02-40.00-000. Representative: Mr. Tailap Luk, Property Owner. Mrs. Townshend stated that as you may recall, the last annexation request that was heard about three (3) years ago. There was the determination that was made after the Planning Commission recommended against an Annexation that it was not within the pervue of the Planning Commission. The pervue of the Commission is to make a recommendation on zoning. With this in mind, Staff structured their report accordingly. Mrs. Townshend further stated that the adjacent properties also owned by the same owner are zoned C-4 and are closer to the highway. The property request for annexation is located directly behind the Sonic Restaurant. There are three (3) pieces of property owned by the applicant that are currently in the City and zoned C-4 and then there are two (2) pieces of property 110 & 136 Rustic Lane that the applicant has requested annexation and zoning of C-2A. Mrs. Townshend further stated that the purpose of the C-2A zoning is that it allows mixed use. Also, if you look at the location of these two (2) properties they are further back from the highway. The Highway Commercial Zone becomes a little less appropriate as you get out of the highway and transitioning into a residential neighborhood. Staff provided in the report an overview of the types of uses permitted in the C-2A zone. The applicant wants to do a mixed use which would include residential and first floor retail. The zoning requested is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan that is in a high priority annexation area. Comments were received from other agencies including under the advisory comments that there are some technical issues that the applicant will have to deal with in terms of getting sewer and water to the site. When there is a development application, they will have to deal with the Kent Conservation District and DelDOT requirements associated with that application. Mr. Holt questioned with regards to the sewer/septic and your continued use of it will this be permanent or will they be made to tie into the City’s? Responding to Mr. Holt, Mrs. Townshend stated that they can tie in; however, there is a lot of main that they will have to install to serve the property and they will work with the Public Works Department to design that. Mr. Luk stated that he spoke with the owner of the Sonic Restaurant today and he will be working with him to get this done. Mr. Holt further stated that it would be to your advantage to do this because with his experience being in real estate for a few years, he is aware of the problems that come up with septic systems and they are continuous.

Report to City Council AX-12-01 Lands of Taililou, LLC 110 & 136 Rustic Lane Page | 5 Colonel Welsh opened a public hearing. Mr. William McKee – 111 Rustic Lane – Stated that he is against this request. The house that he (the applicant) has at 136 Rustic Lane has five (5) families living in this house that is a single family home and it has a sewer problem. All of the people he has talked to in this area are against this request. He lives at the second home on the left as you come onto Rustic Lane behind the Wawa. The people who live in the first and third place also do not want it. He also owns the fourth lot on Rustic Lane behind the Wawa and the sewer in this area is not that great. This home that they live in has poor maintenance on it and has four to five weeks of papers laying out in the front yard. Colonel Welsh closed the public hearing after seeing no one else wishing to speak. Mr. Tolbert stated that this application is dealing with a petition to annex and zone exclusively at this point. Responding to Mr. Tolbert, Mrs. Townshend stated that this was correct. He was concerned that discussion was brought up about what is going on at that site and this application deals exclusively with annexing and zoning. Mr. Tolbert moved to forward to City Council a recommendation of approval for AX-12-01 Lands of Taililou LLC located at 110 and 136 Rustic Lane to C-2A (Limited Central Commercial Zone), seconded by Mr. Holt and the motion was unanimously carried 8-0. Mrs. Townshend questioned for clarification if the reasons for supporting the rezoning as requested are the reasons laid out in the Staff Report? Responding to Mrs. Townshend, Mr. Tolbert stated that yes they are.

City of Dover Application No.: AX-12-01 Department of Planning & Inspections SC-3 136 Site 110 C-4 RC C-4 C-4 IO NE LA DU PO ST NT IC RU HI G C-4 H W AY C-4 Plan Title: Lands of Taililou, LLC Location: 110 and 136 Rustic Lane Legend Plan Type: Annexation Tax Parcels: ED-00-057.02-02-38.00 and ED-00-057-02-02-40.00 Zoning Proposed Zoning: C-2A Proposed Land Use Classification: Mixed Use Dover Parcels Annexation Classification: Category 1 Priority Kent County Parcels Owner: Taililou, LLC Date: 8-31-12 Dover Boundary 0 150 300 600 Feet

CITY OF DOVER DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE APPLICATION REVIEW COMMENTARY STAFF D.A.C. MEETING DATE: SEPTEMBER 26, 2012 APPLICATION: LANDS OF TAILILOU, LLC, 110 & 136 RUSTIC LN. FILE #: AX-12-01 REVIEWING AGENCY: City of Dover Electric and Public Works Departments CONTACT PERSON: Steve Enss - Electric Jason A. Lyon – Public Works CONTACT PHONE #: Electric - 302-736-7070 Public Works – 302-736-7025 T HE S UBJECT P ROPOSAL HAS BEEN R EVIEWED FOR C ODE C OMPLIANCE , P LAN C ONFORMITY AND C OMPLETENESS IN A CCORDANCE WITH THIS A GENCY ’ S A UTHORITY AND A REA OF E XPERTISE . T HE F OLLOWING I TEMS HAVE BEEN I DENTIFIED AS E LEMENTS W HICH N EED TO BE A DDRESSED BY THE A PPLICANT : CITY AND STATE CODE REQUIREMENTS ELECTRIC / WATER / WASTEWATER / STORMWATER / SANITATION / STREETS / GROUNDS 1. Our office has no objections to the proposed annexation of tax parcels ED-00-057.02-02-38.00-000 and ED-00- 057.02-02-40.00-000 RECOMMENDATIONS SUGGESTED AS CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TO MEET CODE OBJECTIVES ELECTRIC / WATER / WASTEWATER / STORMWATER / SANITATION / STREETS / GROUNDS 1. None ADVISORY COMMENTS TO THE APPLICANT ELECTRIC 1. None. WATER 1. As per the Petition to Annex and Zone Property, as heard by the City of Dover Utility Committee, September 24, 2012, please find the following: a. There is currently an eight-inch (8”) water main that terminates at 58 E. Rustic Lane. To receive water service, the developer / owner of the subject properties must extend the water main to the easternmost property line of 136 East Rustic Lane. Infrastructure must be installed in accordance with the requirements of the City of Dover Water / Wastewater Handbook and DelDOT. b. The subject parcels are currently located within Tidewater Utilities Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity (CPCN). The property owner must follow the appropriate guidelines to allow for transference to the City of Dover’s CPCN.

Lands of Talilou, LLC File #: AX-12-01 September 26, 2012 Page 2 of 2 WASTEWATER 1. As per the Petition to Annex and Zone Property, as heard by the City of Dover Utility Committee, September 24, 2012, please find the following: a. Currently, there is no City of Dover gravity sanitary sewer service on East Rustic Lane. The closest City of Dover gravity sanitary sewer main is roughly 770 linear feet south of the intersection of East Rustic Lane and Route 13. There is also a one and one quarter inch (1-1/4”) force main located on the east side of Route 13, utilized by WaWa and the Sonic, which is now a maintenance responsibility of the City of Dover. b. Providing sanitary sewer service to this area has been a long term goal of the Department of Public Works and will continue to be pursued through an out year capital improvement project as options become available to provide sanitary sewer service to the community as a whole. c. Until such time as gravity sanitary sewer service becomes available to the community the options for service are limited. The owner / developer of the subject properties could perform the following, in accordance with the Water / Wastewater Handbook: i. Install approximately 1,531 linear feet of sanitary sewer main (provided gravity flow can be obtained). This option has limited viability as it would be cost-prohibitive to any project and would not be approved by DelDOT for at least five (5) years, as Route 13 was recently repaved. ii. Utilize grinder pumps and install a force main connection to Route 13. This would become a long term maintenance responsibility for the City of Dover, which is discouraged unless there is a community benefit, as East Rustic Lane is a State road. In addition, the existing force main referenced may be unable to receive any additional contribution and connection in Route 13 would not be approved as noted above. The properties would be required to connect to gravity sanitary sewer when it became available. iii. The subject properties could continue to use a septic system. This option would only be viable for residential use if also approved by DNREC and adequate space was available. The property would be required to connect to public sewer when it became available. d. Due to the information above regarding the wastewater utility, future uses of the subject properties would therefore be limited. STORMWATER / SANITATION / STREETS / GROUNDS 1. None. I F Y OU H AVE A NY Q UESTIONS OR N EED TO D ISCUSS ANY OF THE A BOVE C OMMENTS , P LEASE C ALL THE A BOVE C ONTACT P ERSON AND THE P LANNING D EPARTMENT AS S OON AS P OSSIBLE .

CITY OF DOVER DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE APPLICATION REVIEW COMMENTARY September 2012 APPLICATION: Lands of Taililou FILE #: AX-12-01 REVIEWING AGENCY: Kent Conservation District CONTACT PERSON: David C. Cahill PHONE #: 741-2600 ext.3 THE SUBJECT PROPOSAL HAS BEEN REVIEWED FOR CODE COMPLIANCE, PLAN CONFORMITY AND COMPLETENESS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THIS AGENCY’S AUTHORITY AND AREA OF EXPERTISE. THE FOLLOWING ITEMS HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED AS ELEMENTS WHICH NEED TO BE ADDRESSED BY THE APPLICANT: CITY AND STATE CODE REQUIREMENTS: 1. Kent Conservation District has no objection to the annexation of the above referenced site. ADVISORY COMMENTS TO THE APPLICANT: The Following comments are advisory and apply to the development of a detailed site plan for this project. 1. If at any time expansion or earth disturbing activity (clearing, grubbing tree clearing etc.) takes place and exceeds 5000 square feet; a detailed Sediment and Stormwater Management Plan must be submitted and approved to the Kent Conversation District.

CITY OF DOVER D E DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE L APPLICATION REVIEW COMMENTARY D O D.A.C. MEETING DATE: September 26, 2012 T =============================================================== APPLICATION: Lands of Taililou LLC at 110 and 136 Rustic Lane FILE#: AX-12-01 REVIEWING AGENCY: DelDOT CONTACT PERSON: Julio F. Seneus PHONE#: 760-2145 =============================================================== THE SUBJECT PROPOSAL HAS BEEN REVIEWED FOR CODE COMPLIANCE, PLAN CONFORMITY AND COMPLETENESS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THIS AGENCY'S AUTHORITY AND AREA OF EXPERTISE. THE FOLLOWING ITEMS HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED AS ELEMENTS WHICH NEED TO BE ADDRESSED BY THE APPLICANT: CITY & STATE CODE REQUIREMENTS: 1. The Department has no comments. RECOMMENDATIONS SUGGESTED AS CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TO MEET CODE OBJECTIVES: ADVISORY COMMENTS TO THE APPLICANT FOR THE REZONING: • A Traffic Impact Study (TIS) will be required if the proposed business exceeds 50 VPH (vehicle per Peak Hour) or 400 VPD (vehicle per day). When the study is completed, DelDOT will review it and send recommendations of the improvements to Kent County. The improvements contained in the study will be implemented by the developer per DelDOT's discretion. Please, contact Mr. Troy Brestel at (302) 760-2167 or via e-mail at Troy.Brestel@state.de.us to set up a scoping meeting for this project. • A pre-submittal meeting with the applicant will be required, if the proposed development generates 200 vehicles per day (VPD). • In order to be issued an entrance permit, the department will require the applicant to provide the proper forms, fees, and entrance plans. If you have any questions or need to discuss any of the above comments, please call the above contact person and the planning department as soon as possible.

FINAL READING CITY OF DOVER PROPOSED ORDINANCE #2012-21 1 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND ZONING MAP OF THE 2 CITY OF DOVER BY CHANGING THE ZONING DESIGNATION OF PROPERTIES LOCATED 3 AT 110 AND 136 RUSTIC LANE 4 WHEREAS, the City of Dover has enacted a zoning ordinance regulating the use of property within 5 the limits of the City of Dover; and 6 WHEREAS, it is deemed in the best interest of zoning and planning to change the permitted use of 7 property described below from BG - General Business (110) (ED00-057.02-02-38.00-000) and 8 RMH - Residential Manufactured Home District (136) (ED00-057.02-02-40.00-000) (Kent County 9 zoning classifications) to C-2A - Limited Central Commercial (City of Dover zoning classification). 10 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF 11 DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: 12 1. That from and after the passage and approval of this ordinance the Zoning Map and Zoning 13 Ordinance of the City of Dover have been amended by changing the zoning designations from 14 BG - General Business (110) and RMH - Residential Manufactured Home District (136) (Kent 15 County zoning classifications) to C-2A - Limited Central Commercial (City of Dover zoning 16 classification) on those properties located at 110 and 136 Rustic Lane, owned by Taililou, LLC. 17 (THIRD COUNCIL DISTRICT; PLANNING REFERENCE: AX-12-01) 18 ADOPTED: * 19 S:\ANNEXATIONS\Annex-2012\110 and 136 Rustic Lane\Ordinance #2012-21 Rezoning of 110 & 136 Rustic Ln - Final Reading.wpd 20 Actions History 21 November 26, 2012 - Scheduled for Public Hearing/Final Reading Before City Council 22 September 10, 2012 - First Reading/Referral by City Council

ACTION FORM PROCEEDING: Council DEPARTMENT OF ORIGIN: City Manager and Human Resources DATE SUBMITTED: 11/20/12 PREPARED BY: Scott Koenig, P.E., City Manager and Kimberly Hawkins, SPHR, Human Resources Director SUBJECT: Requested pension for Steve Warren and Dewey Ray Lavender REFERENCE: City of Dover General Employee Pension Plan EXHIBITS: Employment Offer Letters (Exhibit A and B), Statement of Intent/Action (Exhibit C and D) RECOMMENDED ACTION: Denial of pension request until Warren and Lavender obtain age 65. BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS The City of Dover is in receipt of a request from the law firm of Wier and Allan, P.A. to immediately grant a pension to Steve Warren and Dewey Ray Lavender. Steve Warren began working for the City of Dover on or about August 26, 1980. Dewey Lavender began working for the City on or about March 17, 1981. Both men remained employed with the City of Dover into 1996. They were then vested in the City’s General Employee Pension Plan. In 1996, D/FD Operating Services took over the operation of the electric plant. The agreement between the City and D/FD provided a variety of options for the affected employees. Some employees, including Messrs. Warren and Lavender were offered employment with D/FD Operating Services. Copies of the offers of employment for Messrs Warren and Lavender are attached hereto as Exhibits A and B respectively. Both men accepted the offers of employment. Each received a “sign on” bonus valued at 50% of his unused City sick leave. The balance of the unused City sick leave would be paid at the time of City retirement. On March 5, 1996, Dewey Lavender executed a Statement of Intent/Action with respect to his General Employees’ Pension Contribution. He chose the option that provided: I am terminating my employment with the City of Dover and am a vested employee. I elect to retain my pension contributions in the Pension Plan and, in accordance with Section 2-190(c) of the General Employees’ Pension Plan. I may apply for pension benefits to the General Employees’ Pension Board of Trustees upon attaining the age of 65. Exhibit C Mr. Lavender’s date of birth is January 24, 1961. Therefore, he is eligible for a pension on January 24, 2026. On March 12, 1996, Steve Warren executed a Statement of Intent/Action with respect to his General Employees’ Pension Contribution. He chose the option that provided: I am terminating my employment with the City of Dover and am a vested employee. I elect to retain my pension contributions in the Pension Plan and, in accordance with Section 2-190(c) of the General Employees’ Pension Plan, I may apply for pension benefits to the General Employees’ Pension Board of Trustees upon attaining the age of 65. Exhibit D Mr. Warren’s date of birth is October 11, 1955. Therefore, he is eligible for a pension on October 11, 2020.

In 1996, §2-190(c) of the City of Dover Code of Ordinances provided: Any participant with a minimum of ten years of continuous service and whose employment is terminated, for reasons other than for cause, prior to the date he becomes eligible for retirement benefits under sections 2-181, 2-182, 2-183 or 2-187 of this code, upon attaining the age of sixty-five (65) years of age, shall be eligible for retirement benefits under the provisions of section 2-185 of this code upon application to the pension board of trustees. The form of the benefit will be based on the formula which was in effect at the time of termination. The current version of this provision is now codified at §2-335(c) of the Code. Messrs. Warren and Lavender worked for D/FD Operating Services while that entity operated the power plant. They participated in that entity’s pension plan. When NAES replaced D/FD Operating Services as the operator of the electric plant, Messrs. Warren and Lavender became employees of NAES and participated in the 401(k) available with that company. The plan includes a 50% contribution match. Since March 1996, neither of the men has been an employee of the City of Dover. Neither has received City paychecks or other benefits provided to City employees. The City has not supervised either man or controlled the work. Messrs. Warren and Lavender claim entitlement to early retirement under §2-327 of the Code. Neither is entitled to such benefit. Such benefits are available only to eligible employees. See §2-327(b). Eligible employees are defined by the Code as a person who is “regularly employed in rendering service to the city on a full-time permanent basis, who is not participating in any other retirement plan to which the City contributes for them, and whose compensation is paid directly by the city. An employee will be considered a full-time employee if he regularly works 40 or more hours each week.” Section 2-321. Messrs. Warren and Lavender do not render service to the City of Dover. They now work for NAES. They have not worked for the City since March 5, 1996, or March 12, 1996. These men do not receive compensation that is paid directly by the City. Messrs. Warren and Lavender will be eligible to receive a City pension under §2-335(c) of the Code when each reaches age 65.

UTILITY COMMITTEE The Utility Committee Meeting was held on November 13, 2012 at 5:00 p.m. with Councilwoman Williams presiding in the absence of Chairman Bonar. Members present were Mr. Perza and Mr. Blakeman. Mr. Snaman was absent. Members of Council present were Mr. Hutchison, Mr. Lynn (arrived at 5:08 p.m.), and Council President Leary (arrived at 5:05 p.m.). Mayor Carey (arrived at 5:03 p.m.) was also present. AGENDA ADDITIONS/DELETIONS Mr. Blakeman moved for approval of the agenda as presented, seconded by Mr. Perza and unanimously carried. Water Quality and Inflow and Infiltration (I & I) Updates Members were provided a presentation entitled “Water Quality Update,” (Attachment #1), a City of Dover Water Quality Applicable Expenditures Report (Attachment #2), a City of Dover Inflow and Infiltration Applicable Expenditures Report (Attachment #3), and a presentation entitled “Inflow/Infiltration Update” (Attachment #4). Mrs. Duca reviewed the “Water Quality Update” presentation (Attachment #1), providing background information on the origin of brown water issues and explaining steps that have been taken to remedy the situation and find solutions. Referring to the Water Quality Expenses and Complaints graph (Page 4 of the presentation) and the City of Dover Water Quality Applicable Expenditures Report (Attachment #2), Mrs. Duca noted that the changes that have been made have brought about significant improvement in terms of stabilizing the water chemistry. In response to Mrs. Williams inquiry regarding the function of the Wellhead Variable Frequency Drive (VFD) Upgrade referenced in the presentation under “Production Capital Improvements,” Mrs. Duca advised that the flow is primarily regulated by pumps rather than gravity, but the VFD allows water to slowly “ramp up” into the system. The VFD controls how quickly water turns on and the pace at which it flows, allowing for less disturbance in the mains. Mrs. Duca reviewed the Distribution Capital Improvements portion of the presentation (Page 7), identifying various methods that have been implemented to design a more structurally superior pipe system, allowing for ease of locating the pipes at all times and minimizing reactions between the iron and the pipes themselves. She explained the prioritization schedule for water main relining and/or replacement projects to meet industry standards and address water quality concerns. Mrs. Duca reviewed improvements that have been or are being made to address the problem, including upgrades to the water main. She noted that future plans include replacing a minimum of one (1) mile of pipe per year beginning in FY 2014, along with other operational improvements and monitoring plans. She concluded this portion of her presentation by outlining the steps needed to move forward to meet the desired improvement goals to the City’s water system, including long-term planning, securing increased long term financial resources and staffing resources, and the utilization of consultants and outside contractors to meet critical timeframes.

UTILITY COMMITTEE MEETING OF NOVEMBER 13, 2012 PAGE 2 Mrs. Duca stated that the City of Dover Inflow and Infiltration Applicable Expenditures Spreadsheet (Attachment #3) was created approximately six (6) years ago to track expenses, and explained that the spreadsheet provides a breakdown of the various projects that have been done on both production and distribution sides, including actual expenses from FY 2003 to FY 2012. Also included on the spreadsheet was a total amount for each category, (including the amount budgeted for this fiscal year) which reflected any carry over required, ensuring everything is accounted for when jobs are complete. She stated that operational expenses including staff time, advertising, laundry claims, complaints, etc., are also included on the spreadsheet. In response to Mrs. Williams regarding the cost of replacing unlined cast iron pipe, Mrs. Duca explained that with staff doing the work, the cost to replace one (1) mile of pipe each year would be under $1M per year since labor is accounted for in the Departments operating expenses. She noted with larger projects, such as the Route 13 project that was recently completed, the expense would exceed $1M per mile. She felt that the time would come when the City’s manpower limitation (having only one (1) crew) would require the use of contractors as well. Mrs. Duca explained that within the next five (5) years, as staff encounters water lines that are more appropriate in size, consideration would be given to relining rather than replacing pipe. She noted that this may require expending a three year (3) allocation of funds for the project within one (1) year to obtain the best cost overall. Mrs. Duca noted that staff was still analyzing this project. In response to Mrs. Williams’ concerns regarding leakage into groundwater and the County’s sewer system, Mrs. Duca explained that leakage would not necessarily go into the sewer; however, the Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control (DNREC) had issues regarding slow leaks from the system into the ground. She noted that DNREC had concerns regarding how quickly chlorinated water reaches a receiving body of water; therefore, it was important to keep the City’s water loss at a minimum. Responding to Councilman Hutchison regarding the life expectancy of the new piping that was recommended, Mrs. Duca advised members that the cement-lined ductile iron pipe has had the best field testing and has a life expectancy of approximately 80-100 years. She noted that the existing cast iron lines had been in the ground for approximately 100 years and were manufactured prior to relining technology development. Mrs. Duca explained that the process of replacing pipes in the City began about six (6) or seven (7) years ago and included the replacement of some of the lines that were installed in the early 1800s. She noted that these projects would improve the structural integrity of the system. Proceeding to the Inflow/Infiltration Update presentation (Attachment #4), Mrs. Duca provided an overview of the program and stated that these assessments had not been “on the books” as long as the water quality concerns, so it had taken some time to identify the issues and the best way to address the problem. She reviewed the presentation, outlining specifics pertaining to the City’s Inflow & Infiltration system. She attributed much of the problem to the age of the City’s pipes and progressive deterioration, which increase the possibility of groundwater entering the system and

UTILITY COMMITTEE MEETING OF NOVEMBER 13, 2012 PAGE 3 resulting in increased cost to the City. Mrs. Duca reminded members that the City pays for what is discharged; however, customers are charged based on their usage. Referring to Page 4 of the presentation, Mrs. Duca explained that inflow and infiltration can enter the system as a result of broken laterals, mains, manholes, direct connections, and sump pump connections, all of which contribute to the issue of what enters the City’s sanitary sewer system and is not directed to the storm drain or other drainage features. She elaborated by displaying a chart representing the increased costs associated with the inflow and infiltration issues. Mrs. Duca presented some of the ways the City is trying to assess the problems and strategies being implemented to work toward resolution, explaining that this is a huge undertaking and requires prioritization based on research regarding the level of damage and structural integrity. She identified several tools which are utilized to accomplish this, including the City’s Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) Sewer Truck and staff certification in the Pipeline Assessment Certification Program (PACP) for the use of the GraniteXP software, allowing them to assess each pipe in the system. Mrs. Duca advised members of the efforts currently in motion to address the problem, including interceptors on Division Street, northwest Loockerman Street, and the St. Jones, as well as main replacements on New and Reed Streets, infrastructure replacement in Morris Estates, and Fox Hall manhole replacement. She stated that the Fox Hall manhole replacement was almost complete and was the last item that would be attributed to City I & I infrastructure; remaining concerns are related to I & I from private sources. Mrs. Duca concluded her presentation by outlining the resources needed to achieve the desired results, including increased dedicated financial resources, increased and long term staffing resources, and utilization of outside consultants and contractors to meet critical timeframes. She noted that the cost of utilizing contractors to complete the work was much higher on the I & I side due to the specialty relining, as well as the ultimatums on the actual replacement of the sewer line. Referring to the City of Dover Inflow and Infiltration Applicable Expenditures Report (Attachment #3), Mrs. Duca explained that the report, which dates back to FY 2008 when projects began in an effort to resolve the I & I problem, outlined the expenses involved in the various projects, including the CCTV Sewer Truck investment, staff time, etc. She noted that the cost of doing the work internally by utilizing the truck and internal staff was a fraction of what it would cost to use an outside contractor. Mrs. Duca stated that the City is trying to get Kent County to grant impact fee credits for what is being removed from the system to offset some of the expenses incurred. Committee action was not required. Quarterly Review of Utility Related Capital Investment Plan (CIP) (Electric and Water/Wastewater) (July, August, and September) Due to time constraints, this item was deferred until the next meeting.

UTILITY COMMITTEE MEETING OF NOVEMBER 13, 2012 PAGE 4 TEA/NAES Report (August) Due to time constraints, this item was deferred until the next meeting. Updates - Garrison Oak Technical Park Due to time constraints, this item was deferred until the next meeting. Mr. Blakeman moved for adjournment, seconded by Mr. Perza and unanimously carried. Meeting Adjourned at 5:30 P.M. Beverly C. Williams Acting Chair BCW/DD/mk/js/tm S:\AGENDAS-MINUTES-PACKETS\Committee-Minutes\2012\11-13-2012 UTILITY.wpd Attachment Attachment #1 - Water Quality Update Presentation Attachment #2 - City of Dover Water Quality Applicable Expenditures Attachment #3 - City of Dover Inflow and Infiltration Applicable Expenditures Attachment #4 - Inflow/Infiltration Update Presentation

Attachment #1 Utility Committee Meeting November 13, 2012 WATER QUALITY UPDATE UTILITY COMMITTEE PRESENTATION Attachment #1 NOVEMBER 13, 2012 Utility Committee Meeting November 13, 2012 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS

WATER QUALITY OVERVIEW • Water Quality issues (i.e. brown water) began in 2002 following the implementation of mandated chemical addition. • As is the case with other systems nationwide, Dover’s water system was not designed for chemical addition. ▫ Complex system ▫ 3 aquifer sources ▫ Multiple entry points (1 Water Treatment Plant and 15 unmanned wells with treatment)

WATER QUALITY OVERVIEW • Consultants have been utilized to assist staff in analyzing the system, finding solutions to brown water issues and designing projects. • “Magic Pill” or “Textbook” solutions do not exist. • It will take the dedication of staff time and financial resources to address all components relating to this problem.

WATER QUALITY EXPENSES & COMPLAINTS

ADDRESSING THE PROBLEM – PRODUCTION CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS • Deep Well Contact Chambers ▫ Chambers have been installed at all sites by our in-house Construction Crew ▫ Will be required at any future deep well sites ▫ Testing by our Water Operators demonstrates that chemical reactions resulting from mandated chemical addition are stabilized

ADDRESSING THE PROBLEM – PRODUCTION CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS • Wellhead Redevelopment Program ▫ Annual program to improve capacity and flow • Wellhead VFD Upgrades ▫ Installed at appropriate wells to improve flow control • Remote Control & Monitor Wells ▫ Installed to improve control at all well sites, primarily by our Water Operators

ADDRESSING THE PROBLEM – DISTRIBUTION CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS • Pipe material control ▫ Cement-lined DIP • Water Main Replacement Priority List ▫ Developed by our engineering staff to determine prioritization schedule for water main relining and/or replacement projects to meet industry standards and address water quality concerns

ADDRESSING THE PROBLEM – DISTRIBUTION CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS • Water Main Upgrades ▫ Since FY 2009 the Department has upgraded 24,842 l.f. (4.7 miles) of undersized and unlined cast iron pipe primarily with our in-house Construction Crew ▫ It is planned to replace a minimum of one (1) mile per year starting FY 2014

ADDRESSING THE PROBLEM - OPERATIONS • Additional Monitoring & System Analysis ▫ Continuous monitors installed at all well sites by our Water Operators to allow them to receive and respond to water quality parameter changes quickly ▫ New radios and antennas also installed by our Water Operators to enable proper equipment functioning

ADDRESSING THE PROBLEM - OPERATIONS • Water System Flushing ▫ Continue to conduct two (2), three (3) week long system wide flushing operations ▫ Design utilizing water model, perform field testing for and implement Unidirectional Flushing Program for water system to provide the most effective cleaning of the water mains (projected FY 2015)

DESIRED RESULTS AND RESOURCES • The improvements desired to the City’s water system will require: ▫ Increased, dedicated and long term financial resources.  FY 2013 Capital Budget = $916,142 ▫ Increased, dedicated and long term staffing resources.  Goals will require time from our 36 Water / Wastewater Utility staff members including engineers, field crews, construction workers, inspectors and water operators. ▫ Utilization of consultants and outside contractors to meet critical time frames.

Attachment #2 Utility Committee Meeting November 13, 2012 CITY OF DOVER WATER QUALITY APPLICABLE EXPENDITURES PROJECT INFORMATION FY 2003 FY 2004 FY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 TO DATE FY 2013 BUD Production CIP Expenses Wellhead Redevelopment Program $12,179.00 $52,736.00 SPENT: Description : capacity and flow improvements WD0801 WD1102 $67,675.00 WQ Recommendation : n/a $32,151.00 PENDING: Account # : 417-6800-568.40-31 $990.00 $150,961.29 $143,840.15 $23,838.98 $21,984.00 WD0904 $70,238.00 $6,600.00 $55,134.50 $674,695.92 $2,325.00 Project #: WS0201 WS0404 WS0505 WS0606 WD0801 $36,368.00 WD1001 WD1102 WD1203 WD1301 Water System SCADA Upgrade WD0905 Description : flow control improvements WQ Recommendation : data acquisition and storage Account # : 417-6800-568.40-31 $192,198.00 $21,294.60 $213,492.60 Project #: WS0301 WS0301 Water Quality Evaluation Description : system analysis WQ Recommendation : n/a Account # : 417-6800-568.40-34 $1,660.00 $77,407.64 $79,067.64 Project #: WD0504 WD0504 Water Quality Improvements: WTP Transducer / Analyzers Description : flow control improvements, monitoring WQ Recommendation : water quality monitoring (analyzers) Account # : 417-6800-568.40-34 $12,317.10 $12,317.10 Project #: WS0502 Water Quality Improvements: Well #2 VFD Upgrade Description : flow control improvements WQ Recommendation : n/a Account # : 417-6800-568.40-34 $22,655.85 $22,655.85 Project #: WS0502 Water Quality Improvements: Consulting Description : Deep Well Contact Chamber Design, Stage II Disinfection By-Product Rule Analysis WQ Recommendation: deep well contact chambers, preparation for new / pending regulations Account # : 417-6800-568.40-34 $103,765.47 $35,836.70 $139,602.17 Project #: WS0502 WD0811 Bayard Avenue Contact Chamber: Well #13R Description : chlorine reaction time improvements WQ Recommendation : deep well contact chambers Account # : 417-6800-568.40-34/.40-31 $71,043.47 $8,905.21 $79,948.68 Project #: WS0707 WS0707 Remote Control and Monitor Wells Description : flow control improvements WQ Recommendation : n/a Account # : 417-6800-568.40-31 $51,135.46 $63,767.66 $23,104.00 $31,896.00 $169,903.12 Project #: WD0802 WD0802 WD1002 WD1002 Water Quality Improvements: Deep Well Contact Chambers Wells #1, #2, #3, #4, #6, #7, #8, #9, #10, #11, #14, #15 Description : chlorine reaction time improvements Attachment #2 WQ Recommendation : deep well contact chambers Account # : 417-6800-568.40-34/.40-31 $805,753.22 $95,484.30 $901,237.52 Project #: WD0811 WQ0904 Wellhead VFD Upgrades: Well #11 Description : flow control improvements WQ Recommendation : n/a Account # : 417-6800-568.40-31 $2,505.06 $18,780.94 $21,286.00 Project #: WD0808 WD0808 Utility Committee Meeting November 13, 2012 Updated: 11-13-12 Department of Public Works Page 1 of 6

CITY OF DOVER WATER QUALITY APPLICABLE EXPENDITURES PROJECT INFORMATION FY 2003 FY 2004 FY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 TO DATE FY 2013 BUD Wellhead VFD Upgrades: Well #13R Description : flow control improvements WQ Recommendation : n/a Account # : 417-6800-568.40-31 $2,505.06 $11,717.99 $14,223.05 Project #: WD0809 WD0809 Wellhead VFD Upgrades: Well #15 Description : flow control improvements WQ Recommendation : n/a Account # : 417-6800-568.40-31 $2,505.06 $11,717.99 $14,223.05 Project #: WD0810 WD0810 Wellhead VFD Upgrades: Well #3 Description : flow control improvements WQ Recommendation : n/a Account # : 417-6800-568.40-31 $17,960.97 $17,960.97 Project #: WD0901 Wellhead VFD Upgrades: Well #9 Description : flow control improvements WQ Recommendation : n/a Account # : 417-6800-568.40-31 $20,262.38 $20,262.38 Project #: WD0902 Production CIP Expenses $193,188.00 $172,255.89 $145,500.15 $101,246.62 $209,781.89 $931,129.77 $239,692.23 $93,342.00 $38,496.00 $107,870.50 $2,380,876.05 $70,000.00 Distribution System CIP Expenses Dead End Water Main Removal Description : flow improvements WQ Recommendation : n/a Account # : 417-6800-568.40-34 $22,391.79 $22,391.79 Project #: WD0306 Division Street Water Main Upgrade Description : unlined pipe replacement WQ Recommendation : main rehabilitation Account # : 417-6800-568.40-34 $12,033.20 $8,498.73 $1,334,251.51 $1,354,783.44 Project #: WD0304 WD0304 WD0304 Misc. Distribution System Improvements Description : capacity and flow improvements, unlined pipe replacement WQ Recommendation : main rehabilitation Account # : 417-6800-568.40-34 $100.00 $56,440.04 $20,917.96 $36,700.41 $21,449.28 $20,206.06 $21,188.32 $11,352.86 $39,772.12 $228,127.05 Project #: WD0401 WD0503 WS0602 WS0706 WD0806 WD0903 WD1004 WD1101 WD1201 Water Quality Improvements: Bayard Avenue Connection Description : Division Street Upgrade completion WQ Recommendation : main rehabilitation Account # : 417-6800-568.40-34 $23,102.71 $23,102.71 Project #: WS0502 Water Quality Improvements: Water Main Rehabilitation Description : Surveying and Design WQ Recommendation: main rehabilitation Account # : 417-6800-568.40-31 $50,137.50 $50,137.50 Project #: WD0811 Water Quality Improvements: Pear St./West St. Description: capacity improvements, unlined pipe replacement WQ Recommendation : main rehabilitation Account # : 417-6800-568.40-31 $321,903.84 $203,693.63 $525,597.47 Project #: WQ0902 WQ0902 Updated: 11-13-12 Department of Public Works Page 2 of 6

CITY OF DOVER WATER QUALITY APPLICABLE EXPENDITURES PROJECT INFORMATION FY 2003 FY 2004 FY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 TO DATE FY 2013 BUD Water Quality Improvements: South St. Description: capacity improvements, unlined pipe replacement WQ Recommendation : main rehabilitation Account # : 417-6800-568.40-31 $37,469.28 $37,469.28 Project #: WQ0903 Water Quality Improvements: Washington St./Pennsylvania Ave. Description: capacity improvements, unlined pipe replacement WQ Recommendation : main rehabilitation Account # : 417-6800-568.40-31 $310,063.02 $310,063.02 Project #: WQ0901 Water Quality Improvements: Route 13 Water Main Description: capacity improvements, unlined pipe SPENT: replacement $20,055.68 WQ Recommendation : main rehabilitation PENDING: Account # : 417-6800-568.40-31 $67,396.65 $56,599.26 $40,948.72 $1,905,647.45 $2,090,647.76 $172,544.32 Project #: WQ0907 WQ0907 WQ0907 WQ0907 WQ0907 Water Quality Improvements: Bayard Ave. area Partial Const. Description: capacity improvements, unlined pipe replacement WQ Recommendation : main rehabilitation Account # : 417-6800-568.40-31 $6,490.00 $242,720.76 $255,995.67 $505,206.43 Project #: WQ0905 WQ0905 WQ0905 Water Quality Improvements: East of North State Street Description: capacity improvements, unlined pipe replacement WQ Recommendation : main rehabilitation Account # : 417-6800-568.40-31 $29,002.50 $147,821.91 $176,824.41 Project #: WQ0906 WQ0906 S. Governors Avenue Water Main Upgrade Description : capacity improvements unlined pipe replacement WQ Recommendation : main rehabilitation Account # : 417-6800-568.40-34 $2,664.00 $81,534.98 $84,198.98 Project #: WD0807 WD0807 Water Quality Improvements: McKee Run Plant WMR Description: capacity improvements, unlined pipe replacement WQ Recommendation : main rehabilitation Account # : 417-6800-568.40-31 $95,612.76 $95,612.76 Project #: WQ1001 Water Quality Improvements: Walker Road Description : Surveying and Design WQ Recommendation: main rehabilitation Account # : 417-6800-568.40-31 $23,750.00 $23,750.00 Project #: WQ1002 Water Quality Improvements: Loockerman Plaza Description: capacity improvements, unlined pipe replacement WQ Recommendation : main rehabilitation Account # : 417-6800-568.40-31 $104,625.86 $104,625.86 Project #: WQ1101 Updated: 11-13-12 Department of Public Works Page 3 of 6

CITY OF DOVER WATER QUALITY APPLICABLE EXPENDITURES PROJECT INFORMATION FY 2003 FY 2004 FY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 TO DATE FY 2013 BUD Water Quality Improvements: Ross Street Description: capacity improvements, unlined pipe replacement WQ Recommendation : main rehabilitation Account # : 417-6800-568.40-31 $4,250.00 $4,250.00 Project #: WQ1103 Water Quality Improvements: Wesley Campus (N. & S. Bradford) Description: capacity improvements, unlined pipe replacement WQ Recommendation : main rehabilitation Account # : 417-6800-568.40-31 $103,298.32 $103,298.32 Project #: WQ1201 Water Quality Improvements: New Street Description: capacity improvements, unlined pipe replacement WQ Recommendation : main rehabilitation Account # : 417-6800-568.40-31 $26,600.00 $26,600.00 $87,400.00 Project #: WQ1202 WQ1202 Water Quality Improvements: Silver Lake WMR Description: capacity improvements, unlined pipe SPENT: replacement $49,145.82 WQ Recommendation : main rehabilitation PENDING: Account # : 417-6800-568.40-31 $155,300.44 $204,446.26 $85,995.73 Project #: WQ1203 WQ1203 Water Quality Improvements: North Street Description: capacity improvements, unlined pipe SPENT: replacement $33,335.00 WQ Recommendation : main rehabilitation PENDING: Account # : 417-6800-568.40-31 $33,335.00 $11,665.00 Project #: WQ1301 Water Quality Improvements: West Street W Alley Description: capacity improvements, unlined pipe replacement WQ Recommendation : main rehabilitation Account # : 417-6800-568.40-31 $4,250.00 $4,250.00 $161,000.00 Project #: WQ1105 WQ1105 Water Quality Improvements: Columbia Avenue Description: capacity improvements, unlined pipe replacement WQ Recommendation : main rehabilitation Account # : 417-6800-568.40-31 $4,250.00 $4,250.00 Project #: WQ1102 Water Quality Improvements: William Street Description: capacity improvements, unlined pipe replacement WQ Recommendation : main rehabilitation Account # : 417-6800-568.40-31 $4,250.00 $4,250.00 $280,000.00 Project #: WQ1104 WQ1302 Water Quality Improvements: Governors Avenue West Alley Description: capacity improvements, unlined pipe replacement WQ Recommendation : main rehabilitation Account # : 417-6800-568.40-31 $0.00 $15,000.00 Project #: WQ1303 Distribution System CIP Expenses $34,424.99 $8,598.73 $56,440.04 $1,355,169.47 $59,803.12 $71,586.78 $792,531.35 $403,507.97 $564,470.11 $2,568,148.98 $6,017,218.04 $916,141.55 Updated: 11-13-12 Department of Public Works Page 4 of 6

CITY OF DOVER WATER QUALITY APPLICABLE EXPENDITURES PROJECT INFORMATION FY 2003 FY 2004 FY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 TO DATE FY 2013 BUD Operating Expenses Claims Since 12/2002 Description : damaged laundry, etc. WQ Recommendation : n/a Account # : 412-6800-568.20-51 $1,143.31 $3,376.00 $5,586.40 $2,939.41 $1,259.93 $1,888.82 $417.74 $1,220.38 $921.32 $740.60 $19,493.91 $1,000.00 Distribution System Flushing $19,602.12 $112,406.97 $105,572.54 $177,062.77 $184,505.68 $82,072.50 $78,730.45 $77,118.90 $78,205.14 $78,267.80 $993,544.87 $81,600.00 Description : advertising, labor, supplies WQ Recommendation : distribution system flushing program c ADVERTISING Account #: 412-6800-568.30-25 $504.12 $5,309.70 $2,974.44 $9,592.00 $15,340.30 $12,156.08 $9,530.45 $7,218.90 $7,105.14 $5,122.80 $74,853.93 $7,500.00 c LABOR (in-house) Account #: 412-2600/5600/6800/6900/7600 $19,098.00 $106,948.80 $101,856.00 $165,516.00 $168,257.35 $68,768.64 $68,100.00 $68,800.00 $70,000.00 $72,045.00 $909,389.79 $73,000.00 c SUPPLIES - DISTRIBUTION (estimate) Account #: 412-6800-568 $148.47 $742.10 $777.31 $598.03 $892.78 $800.00 $800.00 $800.00 $800.00 $6,358.69 $800.00 c SUPPLIES - WTP (estimate) Account #: 412-7600-576 $1,177.46 $310.00 $255.00 $300.00 $300.00 $300.00 $300.00 $2,942.46 $300.00 System Monitoring Description : sample analysis supplies (est.) WQ Recommendation : distribution system monitoring, water quality monitoring program Account # : 412-7600-576 $3,276.90 $4,521.48 $3,909.00 $3,500.00 $3,500.00 $3,500.00 $3,500.00 $25,707.38 $3,500.00 Operating Expenses $20,745.43 $115,782.97 $111,158.94 $183,279.08 $190,287.09 $87,870.32 $82,648.19 $81,839.28 $82,626.46 $82,508.40 $1,038,746.16 $86,100.00 WATER QUALITY EXPENSE TOTAL $248,358.42 $296,637.59 $313,099.13 $1,639,695.17 $459,872.10 $1,090,586.87 $1,114,871.77 $578,689.25 $685,592.57 $2,758,527.88 $9,436,840.25 $1,072,241.55 WATER QUALITY COMPLAINTS 271 627 906 369 542 241 221 249 111 118 2,956 Updated: 11-13-12 Department of Public Works Page 5 of 6

CITY OF DOVER WATER QUALITY APPLICABLE EXPENDITURES PROJECT INFORMATION FY 2003 FY 2004 FY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 TO DATE FY 2013 BUD $3,000,000.00 3,000 PRODUCTION CIP EXPENSES $107,870.50 $2,500,000.00 DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM CIP EXPENSES 2,500 OPERATING EXPENSES WATER QUALITY COMPLAINTS $2,000,000.00 $101,246.62 2,000 $1,355,169.47 $183,279.08 $2,568,148.98 $1,500,000.00 1,500 $931,129.77 $239,692.23 $145,500.15 $792,531.35 $71,586.78 $56,440.04 $87,870.32 $82,648.19 $172,255.89 $111,158.94 $209,781.89 $38,496.00 $1,000,000.00 1,000 $8,598.73 906 $93,342.00 $564,470.11 $59,803.12 $193,188.00 $115,782.97 $403,507.97 $82,626.46 $190,287.09 $34,424.99 $81,839.28 $20,745.43 627 542 $500,000.00 500 249 369 221 271 111 241 118 $82,508.40 $0.00 0 FY 2003 FY 2004 FY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 Updated: 11-13-12 Department of Public Works Page 6 of 6

Attachment #3 Utility Committee Meeting November 13, 2012 CITY OF DOVER INFLOW AND INFILTRATION APPLICABLE EXPENDITURES PROJECT INFORMATION FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 TO DATE FY 2013 BUD CIP Expenses Inflow/Infiltration Removal Program Description : design, rehabilitation of sanitary sewer with I&I problems Account # : 417-6900-569.40-31 $5,160.98 $1,350.52 $1,767,683.77 $451,249.04 $54,612.78 $2,280,057.09 $1,122,087.22 Project #: WW0803 WW0903 WW1001 WW1101 WW1201 Various Inflow/Infiltration Removal - New Street/Reed Street SPENT: Description : Numerous cracks, reverse flow on main $43,940.52 Account # : 417-6900-569.40-31 $43,940.52 PENDING: $286,059.48 Project #: II1301 Inflow/Infiltration Removal - Fox Hall Sewer Rehab Description : manholes allowing infiltration Account # : 417-6900-569.40-31 $0.00 $142,000.00 Project #: II1302 Inflow/Infiltration Removal - Morris Estates Sewer Rehab Description : pipe deterioration, causing infiltration Account # : 417-6900-569.40-31 $0.00 $276,000.00 Project #: II1303 Inflow/Infiltration Removal - Wesley College Sewer Rehab SPENT Description : Various cracks causing infiltration $7,200.00 Account # : 417-6900-569.40-31 $7,200.00 PENDING: $0.00 Project #: II1304 Inflow/Infiltration Removal - NRG Sewer Rehab Description : Inflitration occuring in existing interceptor Account # : 417-6900-569.40-31 $0.00 $175,000.00 Project #: II1305 Attachment #3 Inflow/Infiltration Removal - FY13 I & I Design SPENT: Description : consultant review of three sanitary sewer basins $14,023.90 Account # : 417-6900-569.40-31 $14,023.90 PENDING: $25,976.10 Project #: II1306 Lepore Road Pump Station Replacement Description : installing new liner in wet well to prohibit infiltration Account # : 417-6900-569.40-31 $0.00 $50,000.00 Utility Committee Meeting November 13, 2012 Project #: WW1104 CIP Expenses $5,160.98 $1,350.52 $1,767,683.77 $451,249.04 $54,612.78 $2,345,221.51 $1,967,287.22 Updated: 11-13-12 Department of Public Works Page 1 of 3

CITY OF DOVER INFLOW AND INFILTRATION APPLICABLE EXPENDITURES PROJECT INFORMATION FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 TO DATE FY 2013 BUD Operating Expenses PACP Certification (10) $3,000.00 $3,000.00 Staff trained to properly identify and rate sanitary sewer condition Recording and Rating Sanitary Sewer Mains $14,734.16 $20,471.08 $35,205.24 $22,645.00 Staff labor hours. GraniteXP Software $3,600.00 $3,600.00 $7,200.00 $3,600.00 Initial software cost and corresponding yearly fee CCTV Camera Truck $199,900.00 $199,900.00 Operating Expenses $0.00 $202,900.00 $0.00 $18,334.16 $24,071.08 $245,305.24 $26,245.00 INFLOW AND INFILTRATION REMOVAL EXPENSE TOTAL $5,160.98 $204,250.52 $1,767,683.77 $469,583.20 $78,683.86 $2,590,526.75 $1,993,532.22 Updated: 11-13-12 Department of Public Works Page 2 of 3

CITY OF DOVER INFLOW AND INFILTRATION APPLICABLE EXPENDITURES PROJECT INFORMATION FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 TO DATE FY 2013 BUD $2,500,000.00 $1,967,287.22 $26,245.00 $2,000,000.00 $1,767,683.77 $0.00 $1,500,000.00 $1,000,000.00 $451,249.04 $18,334.16 $500,000.00 $1,350.52 $202,900.00 $5,160.98 $0.00 $0.00 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 Updated: 11-13-12 Department of Public Works Page 3 of 3

Attachment #4 Utility Committee Meeting November 13, 2012 INFLOW / INFILTRATION UPDATE UTILITY COMMITTEE PRESENTATION Attachment #4 NOVEMBER 13, 2012 Utility Committee Meeting November 13, 2012 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS

INFLOW AND INFILTRATION OVERVIEW • In FY 2010, the City of Dover experienced its wettest year in recent memory. An estimated 1.97 billion gallons were sent for treatment at the Kent County Wastewater Treatment Plant with 0.26 billion gallons sent in March 2010 alone. • On average, the annual volume of wastewater sent is approximately 1.58 billion gallons. The monthly average is approximately 0.13 billion gallons. • At $2.34/1,000 gallons, inflow and infiltration accounts for $304,200 on a monthly basis.

INFLOW AND INFILTRATION OVERVIEW • The threat of infiltration is continuously increasing. The pipes in the ground are deteriorating, which increases the possibility of groundwater entering our sanitary sewer system. • Older homes and developments also have illicit connections to sanitary sewer mains, which send rain water / groundwater to our system. • The City of Dover is a contract user of Kent County and therefore charged by the volume of wastewater sent to the WWTP for treatment.

INFLOW AND INFILTRATION BASICS • Inflow Examples • Roof Drain Connection to the Sanitary Sewer • Uncapped Cleanout, connected to the Sanitary Sewer • Storm Sewer Cross Connection • Infiltration Examples • Broken House Lateral • Root Intrusion into Lateral • Cracked or Broken Sanitary Sewer Pipe

INFLOW AND INFILTRATION EXPENSES

ASSESSING THE PROBLEM • Pump Station Flow Analysis ▫ Developed by engineering staff to determine which sanitary sewer basins have the largest inflow and infiltration problem. ▫ This analysis is utilized to prioritize the video inspection of the sanitary sewer basins. • Rehabilitation Methods ▫ Ultraviolet Cured Fiberglass reliner ▫ Infrastructure replacement

ASSESSING THE PROBLEM • Utilization of CCTV Sewer Truck ▫ Wastewater Maintenance staff assesses the sanitary basins to record any structural/operational issues. • Pipeline Assessment Certification Program (PACP) ▫ Staff are certified in the PACP methodology. With the use of the GraniteXP software package, staff can rate each pipe in the system, justifying the need for rehabilitation.

ASSESSING THE PROBLEM – VIDEO INSPECTIONS

ADDRESSING THE PROBLEM – TRANSMISSION CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS • Inflow and Infiltration Rehabilitation ▫ Division Street, Northwest, Loockerman Street, St. Jones Interceptor Relining ▫ New Street / Reed Street Main Replacement ▫ Morris Estates Infrastructure Replacement ▫ Fox Hall Manhole Replacement

DESIRED RESULTS AND RESOURCES • The improvements desired to the City’s water system will require: ▫ Increased, dedicated and long term financial resources.  FY 2013 Capital Budget = $1,967,287 ▫ Increased, dedicated and long term staffing resources.  Goals will require time from 23 Water / Wastewater Utility staff members including engineers, field crews and inspectors ▫ Utilization of consultants and outside contractors to meet critical time frames.

LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE The Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee meeting was held on November 13, 2012, at 5:32 p.m. with Chairman Lynn presiding. Members present were Mr. Anderson (arrived at 6:05 p.m.), Mr. Hare, Mr. Rushe, and Mr. Shevock. Members of Council present were Council President Leary, Mr. Perza, Mrs. Williams, and Mr. Hutchison. Mayor Carey was also present. AGENDA ADDITIONS/DELETIONS By unanimous consent, the agenda was approved as presented. Proposed Ordinance #2012-23 - FY Budget Revisions Mrs. Donna Mitchell, Controller/Treasurer advised members that Proposed Ordinance #2012-23 would incorporate the following changes into the FY13 Budget: ! The Original Budget for the Police Grant Funds that was missed in the original budget ordinance. " The budget ordinance represents the combined fund summary for three (3) separate Federal and State grants; the individual revenue and expenditure line items will be entered into the City’s financial accounting system for each grant. ! The audited Beginning Balances for the Municipal Street Aid, Library, Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), and Police Grant funds and corresponding revisions to the expenditures. ! Capital project funds are amended to reflect the audited Beginning Balances and corresponding adjustments for those uncompleted projects with multi-year construction periods. ! Amends the Beginning Balances for the Operating Funds to include the carry forward balances to cover the purchase of the mobile and portable radios for Federal Communications Commission (FCC) compliance that was budgeted for in FY12. The offsetting expenditures are also amended by department. ! The remaining Beginning Balances for the Operating Funds will be brought forward for amendment after the completion of the audit. ! Property Taxes are adjusted to reflect higher Payment in Lieu of Taxes (PILOT) from the State of Delaware that was approved in the State budget after the adoption of the City budget. ! The additional Municipal Street Aid funds that the State appropriated for capital outlay on street projects in FY12 are carried forward in the Beginning Balance. This, coupled with another additional appropriation (revenue) for capital outlay, is included in the Municipal Street Aid Budget to be spent this fiscal year.

LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MEETING OF NOVEMBER 13, 2012 PAGE 2 ! Increased the Capital Investment Plan for the Electric Improvement & Extension Fund to provide funding for increased request for new developments and commercial properties, which is an increase of $300,000 which is being taken from the carry forward balance from last year. ! Amends the power supply and generation budget to provide more detail and inclusion of cost of the Solar Renewable Energy Credits. It was noted that all changes were noted in red font in the proposed ordinance. Mrs. Mitchell stated that Line #265 on Page 7 of the ordinance reflected $351,600 that was missed in the original budget. She explained that by July of 2012, adequate funds were produced through generation of electricity to realize a credit, which was included in Line #271, PJM Spot Market, in order to offset the $351,600 rather than changing the budget balance. She also noted that more detail was provided in the revised ordinance in the Electric Revenue Fund Summary regarding energy and supply items. Mr. Hare moved to recommend adoption of Proposed Ordinance #2012-23 - FY 2013 - Budget Revisions, seconded by Mr. Shevock and unanimously carried (Anderson absent). Martin Luther King, Jr. Boulevard During the City Council Meeting of October 8, 2012, a public hearing was held regarding consideration of renaming Division Street within the City limits as Martin Luther King, Jr. Boulevard. At that time, the matter was referred back to the Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee with the stipulation that the Committee would provide a recommendation to City Council within 120 days and that public notification would be provided to all affected parties. (Clerk’s Office Note: Written notification of the November 13, 2012 LF&A meeting regarding the proposed renaming was sent to all owners of property on Division Street.) Councilman Adam Perza reminded members that various proposals to honor Dr. King had been considered over the past several months and that there were two (2) proposals currently before the City: 1) to rename Route 8, Division Street, and Forrest Avenue from the east boundary of the City to the west boundary of the City in Dr. King’s honor, and 2) to rename Division Street from DuPont Highway on the east to Saulsbury Road on the west. He noted that the City had provided opportunities for public comment during two (2) public meetings in order to obtain feedback from business owners, property owners, and government officials from the State and County regarding the impact on the community. He explained that there were significant concerns regarding the potential impact to the business community in terms of costs incurred, private residents had expressed concerns regarding the administrative burdens of changing home addresses, and members of the historic community had made the City aware that the Division Street corridor had been in the community since the 1850s and was historical to the City. Mr. Perza explained that these comments, criticisms, and recommendations were balanced against the concerns of the advocates for the King Street proposal, noting that the City had considered a form of recognition for Dr. King for

LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MEETING OF NOVEMBER 13, 2012 PAGE 3 approximately 20 years with no decision being made. He indicated his desire to submit the Court Street corridor as an alternative plan for consideration, noting that this would not necessarily replace either Division Street plan. Councilman Perza provided a presentation entitled “Public Hearing Re: Dedication of Public Street for Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr.” (Attachment #1). Referring to Page 3 of the presentation, he explained that the alternative proposal would rename the current Court Street, beginning at its intersection with Route 13, as Martin Luther King, Jr. Street or Boulevard and would “wrap around” Legislative Hall, extending to the intersection with Federal Street. The current Duke of York Street would become the northern portion of the proposed corridor, and William Penn Street would become the southern portion. This would include renaming the current Court Street, Duke of York Street, and William Penn Street after Dr. King. Mr. Perza stated that Capital Drive, which serves Courtside Apartments (on the north side of current Court Street), would be renamed as Court Street and would unite with the southern lane of existing Court Street (on the south side of Court Street) which is effectively an “alley” running parallel to Court Street extending to Cowgill Street and serving approximately eight (8) private properties. Mr. Perza advised members that there was precedent in the City for uniting streets such as Capital Drive and the alleyway, pointing out that Kings Highway Southwest extends north past the Governor’s mansion, intersects with Division Street (where Division Street becomes Kings Highway for several blocks), and then turns north at Park Drive past Silver Lake Park and intersects with Route13. He explained that if all of the suggested actions were accomplished, no residents on the north or south sides of Court Street would be impacted and no businesses would be affected. Mr. Perza advised members that four (4) State facilities, including the Haslet Armory, the Tatnall Building, the Delaware Public Archives, and Family Court would be affected. He explained that Family Court would have two (2) address options: 1) retain 400 Court Street because it would be located on the newly defined Court Street, or 2) adopt the Martin Luther King, Jr. renaming. Mr. Perza described this proposal as involving a prominent, visible thoroughfare of the Capital that serves as an entrance to the legislative corridor which attracts attention from Delawareans and legislators from all three (3) counties. He noted that it contains a mixture of residential neighborhoods (including Capital Green, Garden Court Apartments, and Courtside Apartments) and there is no commercial development in the area, with the exception of the Route 13 strip on the eastern boundary. Mr. Perza explained that the advantage of the proposal was that it would minimize much of the impact mentioned in all of the public comments received from City and Kent County residents, Delawareans, and State and County officials. In addition, the cost should be less due to the reduced number of sign changes needed. He noted that consideration of this option at the current Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee meeting was the initial introduction of the plan, which had not been vetted by the public, State, or the City and that more public comment would surely be offered. Mr. Lynn thanked Mr. Perza for his efforts in developing this proposal and expressed his opinion that this was the best solution because it addressed the concerns of residents and businesses.

LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MEETING OF NOVEMBER 13, 2012 PAGE 4 Mr. Anderson stated that he liked the proposal, noting that this thoroughfare was one (1) of the best kept avenues in the City, the location of the seat of government, an entrance for tourists and visitors, and connects Capital Green to Legislative Hall, which he felt was symbolic. He stated that it was just as important that businesses not be disrupted in these economic times, noting that Dr. King was “about not just freedom but jobs.” Mr. Anderson indicated that the proposal addressed all these concerns and showed that the City was listening to the public and he thanked Mr. Perza for his work. Mr. Shevock questioned if any other proposals had been received and if the Committee would follow up to ensure that all property owners were notified of Mr. Perza’s plan. He stated his understanding that the State did not appear to object to the proposal and inquired if this would be documented in writing so that there would be no questions in the future. Mr. Perza reiterated that the plan was just being introduced; therefore, no advertised public meeting had been held to consider this proposal. He stated his belief that Council would schedule a hearing at the appropriate time and notify by mail the State and private property owners who would be impacted. Mr. Perza indicated that approximately 20-25 properties would be affected and it was his belief that 16 of them were owned by either the State or the City. He advised members that efforts had been made to reach out to the State to make them aware of the initial proposal since the City was seeking their input regarding the potential impact to users of the buildings. Mr. Lynn stated that if the proposal were adopted by the Committee it would be sent to Council for approval in two (2) weeks and the first available public hearing date would be December 10, 2012. He believed that the State would be notified and would have an opportunity to appear on or before December 10, 2012 to weigh in. Mr. Shevock questioned if everything in this regard should be in place prior to going to a public hearing because a “fly in the ointment” could appear after the public hearing. He noted that he had no problem with the proposals but felt that feedback should be received prior to going to public hearing because the public hearing could be a waste of time for the Committee and the City unless everything was in order. Mr. Hare stated his understanding that the purpose of the proposed renaming was to honor Dr. King in history and that he could understand the concept of renaming Court Street up to the Legislative Mall area; however, he was not in favor of renaming William Penn and Duke of York Streets since they were prominent in Delaware history. Mr. Perza indicated that he felt this was a fair comment to make for historians who are aware of the Duke of York’s contributions from England and William Penn’s contributions from Pennsylvania. He felt that these concerns should be considered through this process and that the Committee or Council could modify the proposal. Mr. Hare felt that renaming Court Street and honoring Dr. King “in the same breath” as William Penn and the Duke of York was appropriate. He felt that the correct process should be followed and should be “as pure as the results.”

LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MEETING OF NOVEMBER 13, 2012 PAGE 5 Mr. Perza stated that a number of the components to the process had been streamlined and many of the logistical arguments that were previously obstacles were removed. He agreed that there would be discussion as to what William Penn and the Duke of York mean to the State and this would be weighed against the contributions of Dr. King to members of the community, noting that history means different things to different people. Responding to Mr. Lynn, Mr. Perza confirmed that no private individuals or businesses would be impacted by the proposal in terms of having to change driver’s licenses, social security information, etc. Mr. Hutchison thanked Mr. Perza for his efforts and inquired if any other locations had been considered by the Committee. Mr. Anderson stated that he had heard that interest was expressed in renaming the Dover Public Library after Dr. King. Mr. Hare noted that a suggestion had been received regarding renaming newly created parks or “different things in the parks” in honor of Dr. King. Mr. Koenig confirmed that emails had been received regarding the potential for naming a park system or part of a park system after Dr. King. Mr. Hutchison stated that a location directly across from the Police Memorial had been suggested as a site for a memorial for Dr. King. He indicated that he would like to see a list of the options, to include feedback, and that the selection should be made as quickly as possible. Mr. Lynn reiterated the options before the Committee regarding this matter, as follows: 1) The entirety of Division Street, as previously suggested by Councilman Bonar. 2) A portion of Division Street (the original proposal from Route 13 to Saulsbury Road). 3) Mr. Perza’s Court Street proposal. 4) The renaming of the Dover Public Library. 5) The naming of a proposed pocket park system. Mr. Lynn noted that only one (1) of these parks exists to date in the form of an empty lot on the corner of North Street and Governors Avenue, which is completely unimproved. Mr. Shevock inquired if Mr. Perza’s proposal was a three (3) pronged proposal that could be divided as follows: a) Court Street only. b) Court and Duke of York Streets only. c) Court, Duke of York, and William Penn Streets. Mr. Lynn stated that any of those alternatives were on the table.

LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MEETING OF NOVEMBER 13, 2012 PAGE 6 Members were provided correspondence received regarding this matter (Attachment #2). Mr. Lynn noted that a sign-in sheet had been made available for those who wished to comment and advised speakers to keep in mind that advocates of the Martin Luther King, Jr. Boulevard proposal were leaning toward the Court Street option. He reminded speakers that comments would be limited to three (3) minutes and that the meeting was running a bit behind. Ms. Carroll-Lisa Malone, 1559 Forrest Avenue, inquired if Legislative Mall was the only name of the green, grassy area [between Duke of York and William Penn Streets]. Responding, Mr. Perza stated that he did not believe that this area had a name but that it may be codified as Independence Park, although he was unsure. Ms. Malone suggested that if there was concern about renaming Duke of York Street and William Penn Street, perhaps only Court Street could be renamed and the park could be named Martin Luther King Park. Mr. Perza stated that he had been taking notes from all those who appeared and would add this idea to the list of public comments. Ms. Malone indicated that she had prepared a statement with objections to the renaming of the Forrest Avenue corridor (Attachment #3) but had no objections to the Court Street proposal in its various forms that were suggested or the renaming of the Dover library. Mr. David Louie, 1684 N. Little Creek Road, read the following statement into the record: We, the 580 residents and businesses on Division Street, received a letter concerning this meeting tonight in reference to renaming Division Street from Artis Drive to Long Point Road to Martin Luther King, Jr. Boulevard. Since I live on North Little Creek Road and will be affected by expense and time, I wanted to be sure this committee and Council will follow City of Dover Code and Charter. Whereas, every 580 residents and businesses will be petitioned to where we either want a street name change or we do not. And, this committee or Council will not “by pass” the charter or code and pass this name change without the petition being presented to all those concerned. In Oct. 2012, I received a statement from an investment firm for my son and it still had my old address from when my address was Division Street and later changed to North Little Creek, this was over 8 years ago. I am still updating companies from that change. Mr. Emil Voshell, 1125 E. Division Street, stated that he had resided at his address for over 50 years and inquired if his property would be included in this proposal. Responding, Mr. Lynn stated that under Mr. Perza’s proposal Division Street would be completely unaffected. However, if any of the multiple proposals on the table with regard to Division Street were adopted, Mr. Voshell’s particular house may be affected. Mr. John Welgin, 1082 Forrest Avenue, stated that he spoke at the previous meeting and advised members that he was not in favor of the street name change and had failed to mention that his parcel of land was not within the City of Dover but was in Kent County. He felt that the City could not legally change his County address. He stated that he felt that Mr. Perza’s proposal was “fantastic” and he was “all for it.”

LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MEETING OF NOVEMBER 13, 2012 PAGE 7 Ms. Justine Jarrell Davis, 5233 S. DuPont Highway, stated that she was 100% against changing the name of Dover’s 150-year-old historic Division Street. She explained that she and her family had owned property at 991 Forrest Avenue (on the corner of Saulsbury Road and Forrest Avenue) for over 72 years, that this address had been a constant in their lives, and it would be affected by the first two (2) proposals. She felt that renaming Division Street would create a hardship for all residents and business owners on the street as they would be forced to change the street name on many very important items, from business cards, to signs, checks, wills, etc. Ms. Davis stated that it would also cost the City a great deal for all the new signage, paperwork, and man hours. She noted that, while Dr. Martin Luther King is a prominent figure in our country’s history, he was not in Delaware or Dover history. She indicated that Dover is constantly growing and requested that if a new street name were to be chosen, that it be for a new Dover street rather than historic Division Street. Mr. Vernon Ingram, 402 Greenhill Road, stated that he is a business owner on Division Street. He thanked the Committee for the fine job that they are doing and expressed his agreement with Mr. Perza’s proposal. Mr. Gary Michaels, 1520 N. Little Creek Road, stated that he was recently informed of this issue. He stated that he takes care of an 88-year-old woman and has had a difficult time trying to take care of himself and her. He felt that making such a rapid change as the proposed renaming of Division Street was unfair to the community. He stated that this was not a racial issue to him but it was his personal opinion regarding how those affected would suffer the consequences. Mr. Michaels questioned if 1520 N. Little Creek Road would be affected. Responding, Mrs. Ann Marie Townshend, Director of Planning and Community Development, stated that if the property was within City limits it would be affected by the most expansive proposal in regard to Division Street. Mr. Charles David, 751 Hatchery Road, stated that he planned to speak about history and was speaking as a private person, with no connection to any organization. He provided members with a written statement and historical information including an excerpt from “A History of Kent County Delaware,” by Harold B. Hancock, and an excerpt from a Presbyterian Church history entitled “Bridge Across the Years,” by Aline Noren Ehinger (Attachment #4). He advised members that a good deal of history made in Delaware since the time of William Penn was included in “Bridge Across the Years.” Mr. David reminded members that the City of Dover was the first City of the First State and that this creates pride among residents due to the history which has been forged over the centuries, from William Penn’s inception until today. It was his opinion that history has been made and that “history is history” and, like birthdays, cannot be changed. He felt that trying to change or do over what has gone before is not giving credence to our forefathers and that this applies to the renaming of Division Street. He read from Page 114 of “Bridge Across the Years,” as follows: A wealthy, well-known and distinguished Dover citizen, Reverend Thomas Budd Bradford, was a member of the Dover congregation from 1850 to his death 1871. He had inherited extensive property in and around Dover from his uncle, Nicholas Loockerman, and lived in the Bradford-Loockerman House at 419 South State Street. He was active in the life of the town due to his large property holdings and to his enjoyment in knowing people and in having a part in social and business activities.

LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MEETING OF NOVEMBER 13, 2012 PAGE 8 He was well known in this small town which numbered about 600 people within the city limits. In the 1850's Mr. Bradford laid out all his property in building lots and streets and proposed the name Bradford City. Mr. Lynn advised Mr. David that he had exceeded the three (3) minute time limitation. He apologized for cutting Mr. David off; however, he noted that the sign-in list included two (2) full sheets of names of individuals who wished to speak on this matter. Mr. David stated that he took this as an offense against what he was attempting to present. Mr. Lynn stated that although he found the information informative and educational, only three (3) minutes could be allotted per speaker. He suggested that Mr. David provide information to Committee members in writing or at a subsequent hearing on this matter. Ms. Florene LeCompte, 1110 E. Division Street, stated that she wished to present a statement from one (1) of the residents on her street who was unavailable to speak because she was not in town and did not know about the proposal and began to read a statement, as follows: “For reasons of personal security, I prefer not to reveal my name or specific address because . . .” Mr. Lynn advised Ms. LeCompte that she could make a statement on her own behalf, but not for a third party. Speaking on her own behalf, Ms. LeCompte stated that she agreed with Mr. Perza’s proposal; however, she did not agree with the renaming of William Penn and Duke of York Streets. She expressed her opinion that these streets were part of the City’s history and she did not feel that this should be changed. Referring to Councilman Anderson’s previous comment that he approved of the Court Street option as it related to Capital Green, she questioned why Capital Green would have anything to do with this. She stated that she thought that the matter being considered was not a racial issue; however, she felt that Mr. Anderson’s comment denoted that it was a racial issue. Responding, Mr. Anderson stated that he did not perceive the issue this way, but that Ms. LeCompte should take it the way she liked. Ms. LeCompte expressed her opinion that other options, such as renaming the library or any street that had not already been named would be good options; however, she did not agree with the ABCD corridor of Division Street (from City limit to City limit) because it would affect so many people located on that road. Mr. Kenny Shelton, 1539 Forrest Avenue, stated his agreement with Mr. Perza’s proposal. He noted that he spoke with an individual from Maryland who advised him that a street dedication had been performed to honor troopers who were killed a number of years ago. A large plaque was placed at that location but no addresses were changed and the only cost was a plaque and a dedication. He felt that a memory could be honored without changing addresses. Reverend Michael Rogers, 118 Springfield Way, President, Interdenominational Ministerial Alliance (IMA) (Dover and vicinity) stated that the IMA was pleased to hear the new proposal that was brought forth. He noted that the organization’s original plan was to seek a change to Division Street; however, that Mr. Perza had brought forth a very viable alternative and the organization would like

LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MEETING OF NOVEMBER 13, 2012 PAGE 9 to offer support. Rev. Rogers stated that other options were presented; however, the Court Street area seemed very plausible and prominent for honoring Dr. King. He thanked members and Councilman Perza for their efforts and trusted that Council would see this as a reasonable and viable alternative. Reverend Philemon Hill, 3728 N. DuPont Highway, stated he was glad that some reason had come forth and that “we are not like Congress and everyone has to have their way.” He indicated that the Court Street proposal seemed to be a legitimate proposal and stated that proponents were looking to unify the City rather than to divide it. Rev. Hill explained that the previous recommendation from Route 13 to Saulsbury Road was because of the location of the former William Henry High School, which he stated was predominantly a school for people of color until a change in government took place. He expressed appreciation for Mr. Perza’s efforts. Reverend Rita Mishoe Paige, 355 Rita Wilma Road, stated that the IMA supported Councilman Perza’s proposal for Court, Duke of York, and William Penn Streets and indicated that she would like to go on official record by saying that the IMA had sent the entire Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee a letter officially endorsing that proposal. From a personal standpoint, she stated that she found it offensive that the City government would consider a “scattered” park system, was “embarrassed for [Council]” that this would be considered, and requested that this option be taken off the table. Rev. Paige expressed her opinion that the leadership of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and the entire civil rights movement impacted all 50 states. She stated that because of Dr. Martin Luther King, we can vote, members such as Councilwoman Williams are able to reside on City Council, and all those present at the meeting could be in the room and attend the same schools. Rev. Paige stated that because of Dr. Martin Luther King, history was made in Delaware and all over. On behalf of the IMA, Rev. Paige stated she was in favor of Mr. Perza’s proposal because no residents or businesses would be impacted, it would be less expensive than the Division Street proposal, and it would be a win-win situation for all; therefore, she urged members “let’s do it.” Mr. Paul Davis, 5233 S. DuPont Highway, co-owner of a business at 991 Forrest Avenue, commended the Committee for their work. He noted that he and his wife were opposed to renaming Division Street. He felt that when people sit down and debate or discuss in an intelligent manner a solution can always be found, and he felt this was what had occurred with this issue. He noted that many were affected; however, everyone kept their head and ultimately a great resolution was found. Mr. Davis expressed support for the Court Street proposal; however, he noted that he agreed with Councilman Hare that Duke of York and William Penn Streets should be left alone as part of Delaware history and felt that the same mission could be accomplished by honoring Dr. King by renaming Court Street. He noted that this was how things were accomplished in Delaware, by sitting down and talking about it. Mr. Edwin Baker, Jr., 1526 Forrest Avenue, stated that when he spoke before Council previously on this matter he noted that if people would sit down and get together they could do better and that this had been accomplished. He felt that the Court Street proposal was excellent; however, he agreed with Councilman Hare that a “good look” should be taken at the other two (2) streets as they are part of the City’s history.

LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MEETING OF NOVEMBER 13, 2012 PAGE 10 Mr. EShed Alston, 406 Arnold Court, stated that he had a document that was received from the Clerk of the United States Supreme Court regarding an ongoing appeal to the Court. He began to read some of the questions that he indicated that he presented to the United States Supreme Court from a prepared statement, as follows: Is it not irrefutably true that the U.S. constitutionally protected due process right of law and coinheritance in Civil Law and the equally important legal guarantee in and of the equal protection of American law trumps, outweighs, and completely circumvents any State’s ability to unconstitutionally compromise, trivialize, minimize, victimize-- Mr. Anderson called for a point of order. Mr. Lynn inquired if Mr. Alston’s statement was about the street renaming, noting that this was the topic at hand. Mr. Alston continued to read from his statement. Mr. Lynn reminded Mr. Alston that he had been addressed by the Committee. Mr. Alston stated that the statement did refer to this matter and this was why he was reading it into the record. He expressed his opinion that there was a double standard in the way that the black community was treated, that this was not just his observation but that this matter was presently before the U.S. Supreme Court, and he stated he was reading what the record was. He inquired if he should continue. Mr. Lynn inquired how Mr. Alston’s statement was pertinent to the issue at hand. Mr. Alston stated that the issue at hand was “our current circumstances.” He stated that there were currently lynchings going on in the City, whether people accepted this or not. Mr. Lynn requested that Mr. Alston take his seat since he had deviated from the topic at hand. Mr. Alston stated that the topic at hand was how “we” are treated in this town. Mr. Lynn stated that if Mr. Alston continued he would be removed from the Chamber. Mr. Anderson advised Mr. Alston that an Open Forum would be held later in the evening, beginning at 7:15 p.m. Mr. Alston stated that “there is no inextricability” and that all of this was connected. Mr. James Fogell, 360 Nimitz Road, stated that he wrote a letter to the Mayor and members of City Council about the hardships involved in changing the name of any street. He suggested that a memorial be constructed using privately donated funds, as was done for the Vietnam Veterans’ Memorial in Dover and the Martin Luther King Memorial in Washington, D.C. He noted that funds were donated for these memorials by those who really wanted to honor someone. Mr. Fogell felt that those who want to honor Dr. Martin Luther King should get together and put up a nice memorial, not just a street or a flyer by a street name. He advised members that there was a nice plot where the police officers park near the railroad tracks and he felt that this would be one (1) possible location for such a memorial, where people could sit on the grass and tell their children about Dr. King. He felt that donations could be received from black and white individuals. Mr. Fogell expressed his opinion that those who want a memorial should sacrifice.

LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MEETING OF NOVEMBER 13, 2012 PAGE 11 Former City Councilman Reuben Salters, 109 Bertrand Drive, stated that he had heard a lot of dialogue about the changing of the name and was both dismayed and encouraged by the comments. He expressed his opinion that “we, as good citizens of Dover” would find a way to come to fruition with this project. He indicated that many suggestions had been made. Mr. Salters noted that one (1) individual suggested that advocates pay for a memorial; however, he felt that Dr. King had already paid. As law-abiding citizens with great hearts, he felt that if everyone looked deep into their hearts and souls and thought about what Dr. King did for our nation and world, that the conclusion would be reached that no price was to great to be paid. Mr. Salters felt that “we did not give our life, our honor, we have given nothing but words.” He noted that history changes and depends on who is writing it. He reminded members that Mr. Perza stated that Duke of York Street was named in the 1930s, which he felt was not a long time ago, and that Washington, D.C. was not always Washington, D.C. He felt that history changes all the time and that it was time to start a new chapter in Dover. Mr. Salters suggested that if Mr. Perza’s suggestions were not followed that the $18M library could be named after Dr. King. Mr. Lynn noted that one (1) additional speaker would be allowed. Pastor Richard Avant, Calvary Baptist Church, stated that he had worked with Council over the last 30 years and that 20 years ago he and the Mayor considered changing the name of a street to Martin Luther King Street or Boulevard. At that time, petitions were obtained and the project was ready to move forward, and he suggested Scarborough Road as it had not yet been built; however, 20 years later nothing had been done. Rev. Avant stated that a proposal had been made and Council made a counterproposal through Mr. Perza, and proponents liked that proposal. He stated the desire to get the project accomplished. He noted that the matter had been talked about for a long time and that everyone would never come to agreement and that Mr. Perza’s plan presented the least amount of problems with no businesses involved. He felt that it was a waste of time to talk about Forrest Avenue if Mr. Perza’s proposal were to be moved forward. Rev. Avant stated that he appreciated everything that had been done and was looking forward to moving ahead with the new proposal. Mr. Lynn expressed his pride in being a member of the Committee and in Mr. Perza’s accomplishment in bringing different ideas together. He read the following statement into the record: I have been asked by many since the inception of this debate about why I feel so passionately about the issue, and why the City of Dover, with so many other concerns, feels the need to worry itself with changing the name of one of its oldest streets. I was first introduced, and became intrigued by, the issue of renaming a street to honor to Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., Blvd., when I heard a presentation on the topic at a Towne Point/White Oak Community Homeowners Association Meeting. Listening to the presentation that evening under the fluorescent lights of the ‘lunch room’ in Towne Point Elementary, I quickly realized that, to my Constituents, particularly my African-American Constituents, that this street renaming held significantly more import to their community, the essence of social justice, and their sense of self and worth than merely honoring Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MEETING OF NOVEMBER 13, 2012 PAGE 12 As in all things, I began to research the topic. First, how have other communities dealt with the renaming of streets to honor Dr. King? How have these efforts been received? What are the costs and inconveniences experienced by the individuals and businesses located on those streets? My research led me to Dr. Derek Alderman, Ph.D., a Professor at the University of Tennessee, currently head of Department of Geography, who describes himself as “a cultural and historical geographer interested in public memory, popular culture, and heritage tourism in the U.S.” and whose work “focuses on the rights of African Americans to claim the power to commemorate the past and shape cultural landscapes as part of a broader goal of social and spatial justice.” Reading Dr. Alderman’s work, together with my first- hand experience meeting with my Constituents, confirmed that this issue represents more than a commemorative street renaming, but is, in the words of Dr. Alderman, “a practice of increasing importance to racial and ethnic minorities in the U.S. as they seek ways to recognize their past achievements and struggles and, in turn, to establish their current legitimacy.” Dr. Alderman suggests that more than 900 streets have been commemorated to Dr. King in the United States, across 40 states and the District of Columbia. My constituents maintain that the renaming of such an important road in the City of Dover is a testament to the City’s commitment to social justice, and affirmation of the sacrifices, trials and tribulations endured by the African-American community. Dr. Alderman, in his research, concluded that the renaming of major thoroughfare is representative of a “city’s commitment to recognizing King’s legacy” and that “by asking residents and business owners to change their mailing address, proponents seek to make King’s memory visible and personal to a larger cross section of the community.” Mr. Anderson moved to recommend setting a public hearing before City Council on December 10, 2012 to consider Councilman Perza’s 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. The motion was seconded by Mr. Lynn, and carried by a roll call vote of three (3) yes (Lynn, Anderson, and Rushe) and two (2) no (Hare and Shevock). Mr. Shevock indicated that he felt that the proposal should be presented and voted on in sections to include Court Street; Court, Duke of York, and William Penn Streets; or the Dover Public Library. Mr. Hare agreed with Mr. Shevock. He reiterated that he had no objection to renaming Court Street itself and felt that these issues should be considered separately with two (2) separate hearings.

LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MEETING OF NOVEMBER 13, 2012 PAGE 13 Mr. Anderson pointed out that once the public hearing was held, Council could choose which proposal to pass, could adopt neither or both if they wished to, or could amend the proposal. He felt that there were many avenues that Council could take; however, this was the next step to “keep the ball rolling.” Mr. Shevock noted that if these options could be put forward to Council as separate proposals and if this were part of the motion, he could support the motion. Mr. Lynn stated that the motion had already been voted on. Mr. Hare requested that when this matter is considered before Council that enough time be allowed so that everyone can be heard. Mr. Hare moved for adjournment, seconded by Mr. Rushe and unanimously carried. Meeting adjourned at 7:07 p.m. Sean M. Lynn Chairman SML/DD/js/mk/tm U:\Minutes\11-13-2012 LFA.wpd Attachments Attachment #1 - Public Hearing RE: Dedication of Public Street for Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. Attachment #2 - Correspondence Received Regarding Martin Luther King, Jr. Boulevard Attachment #3 - Statement Provided by Ms. Carroll-Lisa Malone Attachment #4 - Statement and Historical Information Provided by Mr. Charles David

Attachment #1 LF&A Committee Meeting November 13, 2012 City of Dover Legislative Finance and Administration Committee Attachment #1 Public hearing re: Dedication of Public Street for Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. November 13, 2012 LF&A Committee Meeting November 13, 2012

LFA Proposals • Division Street ABCD – East boundary of City to west boundary of City (Route 8/Division Street/Forrest Avenue) • Division Street BC – DuPont Highway (east) to Salisbury Road (west) • Court Street/Duke of York/William Penn Street – DuPont Highway (east) to Federal Street (west)

Court Street • Rededicate Court Street (main artery) as “Martin Luther King Street” • Rededicate – Capital Drive as “Court Street” • No change to Court Street (alley) • Rededicate – Duke of York Street – William Penn Street

Residential impact • Courtside Apartments – no address change, residents retain United Way address • Garden Court Apartments – no address change, residents retain Court Street address • Court Street (alley) private residences – no address change, resident retain Court Street address

Residential classified properties • Residential properties impacted on: • Division Street ABCD 226 • Division Street BC 80 • Court Street 0

All property classifications • Division Street ABCD 373 • Division Street BC 143 • Court Street 24

Address impact • Division Street ABCD 580 • Division Street BC 309 • Court Street 5

Capital Drive (Court Street) • Capital Drive presently situated to north of present Court Street • Capital Drive will be renamed Court Street and connect with existing Court Street (alley) • Garden Court Apartments access road • All residents will retain their Court Street addresses

Family Court (400 Court Street) • Family Court is one of four state owned properties in proposal • Proposal presents state with two options: – 1. Retain 400 Court Street – 2. Adopt 400 Martin Luther King Boulevard • State will confer with the Administrative Office of the Courts – Avoid public confusion over location of the court

Court Street (alley) • Court Street (alley) already exists • Bounded on south by private property, private residences • Unofficial parking for Family Court (400 Court) • King proposal will not impact any property on Court Street (alley)

Entrance to Legislative Corridor • Prominent thoroughfare to the Capital • Mixture of residential neighborhoods – Entrance to Capitol Green – Entrance to Garden Court Apartments • No commercial development

Duke of York Street • Laid out and constructed in 1930s during eastward expansion of Dover to recently completed DuPont Highway • Duke of York was the original grantor of the land that would become Delaware to William Penn • Delaware Public Archives building is presently situated on Duke of York Street

William Penn Street • William Penn, original fee simple holder of the Three Lower Counties (Delaware • Street constructed in 1930s during eastward expansion of Dover to DuPont Highway • Formerly location of minor league baseball field • Site of two state office buildings (Tattnall, former Armory Building)

Attachment #2 LF&A Committee Meeting November 13, 2012 Kelsall, Melanie From: McDowell, Traci Sent: Friday, October 26, 2012 3:33 PM To: Kelsall, Melanie Subject: FW: Martin Luther King Blvd From: McDowell, Traci Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2012 11:40 AM To: Williams, Beverly C. Subject: FW: Martin Luther King Blvd From: Charles Moor [mailto:mmoor86728@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, October 08, 2012 6:15 PM To: tmcdowell-bcw Subject: Martin Luther King Blvd What is the hurry concerning skipping normal procedures to get this issue shoved down the throat of taxpayers. My family has been living in Delaware since the 1600 hundreds and before that came over on the Mayflower. Left England to find freedom to create our own laws. City council members have made a grave mistake in trying to push this through as fast as they did, Martin Luther King Jr., was a great man and we have a national holiday in his honor. Name the new Library in his honor or the new south Dover connector. Name route 1 area that runs through Dover. I live on Forrest Ave and this has been home since 1980. Does anybody care what I think? Charles Moor 1

Kelsall, Melanie From: McDowell, Traci Sent: Friday, October 26, 2012 3:31 PM To: Kelsall, Melanie Subject: FW: better tribute to Martin Luther King, Jr.? ‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐ From: Donald Sauter [mailto:donaldsauter@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2012 4:43 PM To: tmcdowell‐bcw Subject: better tribute to Martin Luther King, Jr.? Dear Beverly, Rename Legislative Avenue to MLK Avenue, short and sweet. Isn't that far more appropriate and far less disruptive? Donald Sauter 1

Kelsall, Melanie From: McDowell, Traci Sent: Friday, October 26, 2012 3:34 PM To: Kelsall, Melanie Subject: FW: Re-Naming Division Street From: McDowell, Traci Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2012 11:40 AM To: Williams, Beverly C. Subject: FW: Re-Naming Division Street From: Ellison Carey [mailto:emclewes@comcast.net] Sent: Monday, October 08, 2012 6:39 PM To: tmcdowell-bcw Subject: Re-Naming Division Street Bev, I am opposed to the re‐naming of Division Street. I hope you will oppose it tonight. The expense to all, the aggravation to homeowners and business’ alike is not a good idea in today’s economic times. We are also changing Dover’s history. I would like to explore George “Jody” Sweeney’s idea by naming the West Dover highway. Perhaps there are other ideas. Martin Luther King can be honored in Dover, but not in this way. Thank you. Ellison Carey 734 Bicentennial Dover DE 19904 734 0398 1

Kelsall, Melanie From: McDowell, Traci Sent: Monday, November 05, 2012 1:50 PM To: Kelsall, Melanie Subject: FW: MLK Honor Compromise From: Jim Stewart [mailto:storemanageramcm@comcast.net] Sent: Friday, October 19, 2012 11:56 AM To: c.carey@dover.de.us; Anderson, David; Leary, Thomas J.; Hutchison, James L.; tmcdowell-bcw; Hare, Bill; Perza, Adam; Bonar, David L; Lynn, Sean M. Subject: MLK Honor Compromise Hello this is Jim Stewart . I am emailing from work. I would like to offer a potential solution to the honoring of MLK/Division St. issue. Go to Channel 6 Philadelphia WPVI and type in Cottman Avenue and Wednesday October 17. They just honored a slain police officer by dedicating a portion of Cottman Ave in his honor. They did so with signage. There was no actual changing of the street name so there was no impact on the people living or doing business on that street or on the City having to change records etc. . I know other cities have done similar things in the past. The only cost to the City is the cost of the signs and their installation. The only discussion would be the design, number and placement of the signs. You could have one per block going East and West if so desired. If you look at the street naming pattern in Dover you notice that the main north‐south streets being Governors and State are not named after any individual. The main downtown East/West Streets being Water and Division are also not named after individuals. Loockerman Street is named after the family and they owned the land on that the street and northwards. On the perimeter the streets are named after land owning families being Walker, McKee and Saulsbury. When (if?) the Dover bypass that would connect to Saulsbury is built it would be a natural to name for MLK but I get the sense that the group pushing this agenda feels a sense of urgency for reasons that are not clear to me. You have one other option and that is Federal Street. Again signage would be the path of least resistance as opposed to actually renaming the street with all the issues involved for the City and those on the street. The biggest impact would be on the Court and the Biggs Museum . I am not sure how the Health Department is addressed. Let me know what you think. Jim 1

Kelsall, Melanie From: McDowell, Traci Sent: Friday, October 26, 2012 3:32 PM To: Kelsall, Melanie Subject: FW: AGAINST RENAMING DIVISION STREET From: Pat Brice [mailto:Pat.Brice@comcast.net] Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2012 2:10 PM To: Hutchison, James L.; Carey Sr., Carleton; tmcdowell-bcw Subject: AGAINST RENAMING DIVISION STREET From: Pat Brice [mailto:Pat.Brice@comcast.net] Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2012 1:59 PM To: 'jlhutch9595@yahoo.com'; 'ccarey@dover.de.us'; 'tmcdowell-bcw@dover.de.us' I am sending an email to state that I am totally against renaming Division Street. There are new streets being build all the time name a new street Martin Luther King. Do Not rename a main downtown historical street. Patricia Brice 106 Stoney Drive Dover, De. 19904 302-734-4150 1

Kelsall, Melanie From: McDowell, Traci Sent: Friday, October 26, 2012 3:31 PM To: Kelsall, Melanie Subject: FW: Division Street From: Carey Sr., Carleton Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2012 4:29 PM To: Shelley Brocklehurst Cc: City Council; City Clerks Office Subject: RE: Division Street Ms. Brocklehurst: Thank You for your E‐Mail with your concerns and recommendation! I will forward your E‐Mail to City Council for their consideration. Best Regards, Carleton E. Carey Sr. Mayor City of Dover 302‐736‐7004 From: Shelley Brocklehurst [mailto:shelley.brocklehurst@comcast.net] Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2012 4:02 PM To: Carey Sr., Carleton Subject: Dear Mr. Mayor, I would like to take a moment of your time to express my concern for changing the name of Division Street to Martin Luther King Boulevard. In my opinion Division Street has been part of Dover for many years and is a landmark in itself. To change the name isn’t only taking away a part of our history, it puts a financial burden on the citizens of Dover during a time when budgets are stretch beyond their means. This is one of the most obscure request I have heard in a very long time. The suggestions about using a street that has yet to be named makes the most sense or renaming the current park on Division Street would be considered a valid request. Thank you for your time, Shelley Brocklehurst 410 Ann Moore Street Dover, DE 19901 1

Kelsall, Melanie From: McDowell, Traci Sent: Monday, November 05, 2012 1:49 PM To: Kelsall, Melanie Subject: FW: Street name changes From: dewey742home@comcast.net [mailto:dewey742home@comcast.net] Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2012 11:20 PM To: c.carey@dover.de.us; davlevianderson@gmail.com; Leary, Thomas J.; Hutchison, James L.; tmcdowell-bcw; Hare, Bill; Perza, Adam; Bonar, David L; slynn@thedelawarelawyer.com Subject: Fwd: Street name changes Ladies and Gentlemen I just received this from the City of Philadelphia. Almost 20 years ago they adopted policy to accomodate honoring people by dedicating stretches of streets without changing the actual mailing/ official address due to the impact on residents and businesses. Its time for Dover to approach the MLK effort with a similiar approach. Every body wins. Jim From: "Jim Stewart" <storemanageramcm@comcast.net> To: dewey742home@comcast.net Sent: Thursday, November 1, 2012 9:59:34 AM Subject: FW: Fw: Street name changes From: Charles.Denny@phila.gov [mailto:Charles.Denny@phila.gov] Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2012 5:59 PM To: Jim Stewart Cc: Richard.Montanez@phila.gov Subject: Re: Fw: Street name changes The City of Philadelphia about two decades ago started the practice of using AKA signs instead of renaming a street. There is significant expenses and effort required for residents and businesses to change there addresses on letter heads and return addresses as well as the expense of changing street Name Signs. We allow the AKA to be added to a block by a resolution of City Council. Our Street Names are 6 inch white letters on a green background. For AKA signs we use a larger plate and on the bottom of the sign we add the AKA name with 4 inch white letters on a Red background. Charles J. Denny P. E. Assistant Chief Traffic Engineer Philadelphia Streets Department Room 980 MSB 1401 J.F. Kennedy Blvd Philadelphia. PA 19102 Phone 215-686-5521 Fax 215-686-5067 Streets Department Customer Service To Richard Montanez/STREETS/Phila@Phila, Charles Denny/STREETS/Phila@Phila Sent by: csstreets@phila.gov cc 1

Subject Fw: Street name changes 10/11/2012 12:11 PM Please respond to csstreets@phila.gov Please advise. Thank you. D. Barraclough The Customer Service Team at the Streets Department http://www.philadelphiastreets.com http:// PhillyRecyclingPAYS.com For faster service and more information please use our Customer Service web page: http://potholes.phila.gov/streetscustomerservice ----- Forwarded by CSStreets on 10/11/2012 10:40 AM ----- "Jim Stewart" <storemanageramcm@comcast.net> To <csstreets@phila.gov> cc 10/10/2012 03:43 PM Subject Street name changes Hello my name is Jim Stewart and I live in Dover, Delaware. Currently a group of citizens wants to honor Martin Luther King by changing the name of a major street in town and there is a lot of debate due to the impact on businesses and the residents re change of address issues etc. I remember seeing streets or section there of being marked in honor of someone but not actually changing the street name for business purposes. The honorific name being added to the street sign. Has that been done in Philadelphia? I know I have seen it and thought it was in Philly. Can you help me? In Dover the argument isn’t about should we honor Dr. King but how. One option is a new road being put in that will be a major road. I have run for city council before and am seeking a compromise solution. Jim Stewart 2

Attachment #3 LF&A Committee Meeting November 13, 2012

Attachment #4 LF&A Committee Meeting November 13, 2012

ACTION FORM PROCEEDING: Council AGENDA ITEM NO.: DEPARTMENT OF ORIGIN: Public Works - Facilities DATE SUBMITTED: 11/16/12 PREPARED BY: Sharon Duca, P.E., Public Works Director / City Engineer SUBJECT: Evaluation of Bids – HVAC Maintenance and Repair Contract REFERENCE: N/A RELATED PROJECT: N/A APPROVALS: City Manager, Controller EXHIBITS: N/A EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $43,950 over three years (projected) AMOUNT BUDGETED: budgeted within multiple Departments operational budgets FUNDING SOURCE (Dept./Page in CIP & Budget): operational budgets TIMETABLE: Contract will be executed following Council approval RECOMMENDED ACTION: Award the bid to Progressive Mechanical Services, Inc. in accordance with the rates bid. BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS The Department of Public Works maintains blanket contracts with contractors that are required to perform services for the City through the Department. These contracts are established in accordance with the purchasing policy. These contracts are often priced as a “time, materials and equipment” type contract and may exceed $25,000 annually. This contract will provide HVAC maintenance and repair to City buildings / facilities and includes provisions for regular and emergency call out services. The facilities included under this contract include the following: Electric Administration Building, equipment at the McKee Power Plant necessary for utility SCADA services, seventeen (17) substations, Weyandt Hall, City Hall, 710 William Street, Dover Park, John W. Pitts Center, Water Treatment Plant and Puncheon Run Pump Station. Although provided as an option, the library is being excluded from the contract at this time. The Department of Public Works created bid documents and the bid package was advertised to the public as an Invitation to Bid in accordance with the City’s purchasing policy by the City’s Purchasing Agent under Bid #13-0009PW. Bids were opened on October 3, 2012. The following five (5) contractors submitted bids for the proposed HVAC Maintenance and Repair Contract: BIDDER ANTICIPATED 3 YEAR COST Core Mechanical, Inc. $59,585.00 AA Ducket, Inc. $205,623.80 Progressive Mechanical Services, Inc. $43,950.00 Worth & Company, Inc. $66,689.00 Multi-Temp Mechanical, Inc. $75,410.00 City staff reviewed the bid packages and found them free of math errors and/or discrepancies. In conclusion staff recommends awarding the HVAC Maintenance and Repair Contract to Progressive Mechanical Services, Inc.

ACTION FORM PROCEEDING: Council AGENDA ITEM NO.: DEPARTMENT OF ORIGIN: Public Works - Streets DATE SUBMITTED: 11/16/12 PREPARED BY: Sharon Duca, P.E., Public Works Director / City Engineer SUBJECT: Robbins Hose Station 2 Ramp Upgrade APPROVALS: City Manager and Controller EXHIBITS: Site Plan EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $85,823.00 AMOUNT BUDGETED: $700,000 * FUNDING SOURCE (Dept./Page in CIP & Budget): Community Transportation Funds - $111,925.00 * The City budget includes $700,000 for potential CT Agreements that get approved throughout the year. TIM TIMETABLE: Notice of Award/Proceed following Council approval, construction to be finalized within sixty (60) calendar days of Notice of Award. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends approval of the only responsive bid, submitted by George & Lynch, Inc., in the amount of $85,823.00. BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS Robbins Hose Fire Company requested a rehabilitation of their ramp at Station 2, located on the corner of Walker Road and Dover-Kenton Road. This rehabilitation would include replacing the existing concrete pad with a new reinforced concrete slab and installing a new reinforced concrete pad in an existing grassed area. The additional concrete area will provide fire apparatus increased maneuverability on the property, which could reduce impedance to the flow of traffic. The Department of Public Works created bid documents and worked with the Community Transportation Fund (CTF) Division of the Delaware Department of Transportation (DelDOT) to acquire the proper funding from local legislators to fund this project. The bid package was advertised to the public as an Invitation to Bid in accordance with the City’s purchasing policy by the City’s Purchasing Agent under Bid #13-0014PW. Bids were opened on October 25, 2012. The following three (3) contractors submitted bids for the proposed project. CONTRACTOR LOCATION AMOUNT OF BID EVALUATED BID PRICE Kent Construction Co. Smyrna, DE $40,043.50^ $40,043.50^ George & Lynch, Inc. Dover, DE $85,823.00 $83,248.31 Donald E. Reisinger, Inc. West Chester, PA $74,200.00* $74,200.00* ^Kent Construction withdrew their bid on November 1, 2012. *Donald E. Reisinger, Inc. did not submit required information for bid (calculations that would indicate the concrete slab could meet the load requirements of the fire apparatus) and therefore was found non-responsive. City staff reviewed the George & Lynch, Inc. bid package and found it free of math errors and/or discrepancies. In addition, staff has reviewed the contractor’s qualification information which included a list of recently completed projects similar in scope to the Robbins Hose Station 2 Ramp Upgrade project, their financial statement and found all information to be adequate. George & Lynch qualified for a 3% reduction of their evaluated bid, which is depicted in the table. In conclusion staff recommends awarding a construction contract to George & Lynch, Inc., in the amount of $85,823.00 for the construction of the Robbins Hose Station 2 Ramp Upgrade.

CONSTRUCTION NOTES: AREA 1: INSTALL 6" REINFORCED (WELDED WIRE MESH) P.C. CONCRETE, WITH BEARING CAPACITY OF 100,000 POUNDS. AREA 2: REMOVE AND REPLACE EXISTING 6" CONCRETE PAD WITH 6" REINFORCED (WELDED WIRE MESH) P.C. CONCRETE WITH BEARING CAPACITY OF 100,000 POUNDS. N/F CITY OF DOVER DEED F-28-0459, D-584-1 N/F ED-05-067.17-01-80.00-000 WASYLKOWSKI, FREDERICK 1293 WALKER ROAD DEED F-28-0459, D-584-1 ED-05-067.17-01-79.00-000 915 KENTON ROAD EXISTING BUILDING AREA 1 (SEE DESCRIPTION) N/F AREA 2 ROBBINS HOSE CO. (SEE DEED F-28-0459, D-584-1 DESCRIPTION) ED-05-067.17-01-80.01-000 911 DOVER KENTON ROAD KE NT (8 ON 0' O. RO R. .) AD W EXISTING MULTI- MODAL PATH EXISTING EDGE R ROAD OF PAVEMENT WALKE VARIES) (WIDTH of D SITE PLAN City ov he er CONCRETE PAD CONSTRUCTION T ACROSS THE LANDS OF ROBBINS HOSE CO. City of Dover Delaware

CITY OF DOVER ORDINANCE # 2012-23 FIRST READING 2012-2013 BUDGET ORDINANCES 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

First Reading of Proposed FY 2013 Budget Ordinance #2012-23 2 of 11 CITY OF DOVER ORDINANCE # 2012-23 2012-2013 BUDGET ORDINANCES 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

First Reading of Proposed FY 2013 Budget 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

First Reading of Proposed FY 2013 Budget 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

First Reading of Proposed FY 2013 Budget 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

First Reading of Proposed FY 2013 Budget 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

First Reading of Proposed FY 2013 Budget 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

First Reading of Proposed FY 2013 Budget 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

First Reading of Proposed FY 2013 Budget 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

First Reading of Proposed FY 2013 Budget 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 THE ABOVE BUDGET INCLUDES THE POLICE GRANTS FUND, USDOJ 397 BYRNE GRANTS FUND AS WELL AS THE OTHER FEDERAL POLICE

First Reading of Proposed FY 2013 Budget 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