Regular City Council Packet

CITY OF DOVER, DELAWARE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, December 08, 2025 at 6:30 PM City Hall Council Chambers, 15 Loockerman Plaza, Dover, Delaware AGENDA VIRTUAL MEETING NOTICE This meeting will be held in the City Hall Council Chambers with electronic access via WebEx. Public participation information is as follows: Dial: 1-650-479-3208 Link: https://shorturl.at/5Je2N Event number: 2531 784 1893 Event password: DOVER (if needed) If you are new to WebEx, get the app now at www.webex.com/ to be ready when the meeting starts. The meeting can also be viewed on Comcast Channel 14, Verizon Channel 20, and on the City's Streaming Player located at www.cityofdover.com under "Quick Links". OPEN FORUM - 15 Minutes Prior to Official Meeting (6:15 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 - Elder Ellis B. Louden PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - Councilwoman Arndt ADOPTION OF AGENDA ADOPTION OF CONSENT AGENDA All Consent Agenda items are considered routine and non-controversial 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. Page 1

REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING - December 08, 2025 PAGE 2 CONSENT AGENDA ADOPTION OF MINUTES 1. Regular City Council Meeting of November 24, 2025 COMMITTEE REPORTS 2. Council Committee of the Whole Report of November 25, 2025 Council Reports 3. First District 4. Second District 5. Third District 6. Fourth District 7. At-Large 8. Council President Neil Safety Advisory and Transportation Committee 9. Quarterly Briefing on Dover/Kent County Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) Projects (Marilyn Smith, Executive Director of the Dover/Kent MPO) (Committee Action Not Required) 10. Prioritization of City of Dover State Capital Transportation Program (CTP) Projects (David S. Hugg, III, City Manager) (Committee Recommendation: Approval of the 2026 Transportation Priorities) Utility Committee 11. Evaluation of Bids - Security Fence Replacement for Water Treatment Plant (Jason Lyon, Water & Wastewater Director) (Committee Recommendation: Award the contract to Pierce Fence Company for the Security Fence Replacement for the Water Treatment Plant, Bid #26-0006WW, for the amount of $216,650.00) 12. Evaluation of Bids - Pump Station #7 Upgrades (Jason Lyon, Water & Wastewater Director) (Committee Recommendation: Award the contract to A-Del Construction for the Pump Station #7 Upgrades project, Bid #26-0008WW, for the amount of $636,548.00.) Page 2

REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING - December 08, 2025 PAGE 3 Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee 13. Evaluation of Bids - Fiscal Year 2026 Street & Alley Program (Jason Lyon, Water &Wastewater Director) (Committee Recommendation: Award the contract to Grassbusters Landscaping Co., Inc, for the City of Dover FY 2026 Street and Alley Program, Bid #26-0007WW, for the amount of $874,256.) 14. Consideration of the Reclassification and Re-grading of the Senior LAN Analyst Position (David S. Hugg, III, City Manager, and Naomi Poole, Human Resources Director) (Committee Recommendation: To defer the item back to committee in thirty to sixty days to see if the applicant has accepted the position, and revisit at a later date, and have the Human Resources Director keep council abreast of what is transpiring.) 15. Proposed Ordinance #2025-17 - Proposed Changes and Additions to Strengthen the Current Stormwater Ordinance by Amending Chapter 98 - Streets, Sidewalks, Storm sewers, and other public places, Article I. - In General, and Appendix F (Mark Nowak, Public Works Director) (Committee Recommendation: Forward Proposed Ordinance #2025-17 to city council for approval) (This item will be considered during the latter part of the meeting - see item #25) 16. Staff Substitute - Proposed Ordinance #2025-21 - Amending Chapter 106 - Traffic and Vehicles, Article III - Stopping, Standing, and Parking, by adding Sec. 106-139 - Pedestrian Safety (Councilman Anderson, David S. Hugg, III, City Manager, and Chief Johnson) (During its meeting of October 28, 2025, the Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee referred the Ordinance back to Staff) (Committee Recommendation: Forward Staff Substitute #1 for Proposed Ordinance #2025-21 to council for approval) (This item will be considered during the latter part of the meeting - see item #26) MONTHLY REPORTS - October 2025 17. City Council’s Community Enhancement Fund Report 18. City Manager’s Report 19. Controller/Treasurer's Budget Report 20. Fire Chief's Report 21. Police Chief's Report Page 3

REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING - December 08, 2025 PAGE 4 ITEMS NOT ON THE CONSENT AGENDA 22. Infrastructure Modernization Project (Joseph Simmons, IT Director) (Staff Recommendation: City Council approve sole source procurement of SAN/Server/Network hardware and services for the Infrastructure Modernization Project IT2610 & IT2613 to improve reliability and enhance cybersecurity protection of the City of Dover's network infrastructure not to exceed $295,000 using the awarded Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) SLGCP grant funds and IT Server Project IT2404.) ORDINANCES FIRST READING REFERRAL - The First Reading is offered on the Proposed Ordinances. It is recommended for referral to the Planning Commission for a public hearing on FEBRUARY 17, 2026 and that a Public Hearing before City Council be set for MARCH 9, 2026 at 6:30 p.m., at which time the Final Reading and Council action will take place. The ordinances are available at the entrance of the Council Chambers, on the City's website at www.cityofdover.com under "Government," or by contacting the City Clerk's Office at 302-736-7008 or cityclerk@dover.de.us. 23. Annexation/Rezoning Request/First Reading of Proposed Ordinance #2025-23 The First Reading is offered on the following Proposed Ordinance #2025-23. It is recommended for referral to the Utility Committee on January 27, 2026; the Planning Commission on February 17, 2026; and that a Public Hearing/final reading be set for March 9, 2026, at 6:30 p.m. The ordinance is available at the entrance of the Council Chambers, on the City's website at www.cityofdover.com under "Government," or by contacting the City Clerk's Office at 736-7008 or cityclerk@dover.de.us. A. Amending the Zoning Ordinance and Zoning Map of the City of Dover by changing the zoning designation from RS-1-Residential Single Family Zone (Kent County zoning classification) to R-8 - One Family Residence Zone (City of Dover zoning classification) on that property located at 7 Nixon Lane, consisting of 41,526 SF +/- (0.9533 acres +/-), owned by Lupe N. Fuller. (Tax Parcel: ED-00-068.19-01-28.00-000; Planning Reference: AX-26-01; Third Council District) 24. Annexation/Rezoning Request/First Reading of Proposed Ordinance #2025-24 The First Reading is offered on the following Proposed Ordinance #2025-24. It is recommended for referral to the Utility Committee on January 27, 2026; the Planning Commission on February 17, 2026; and that a Public Hearing/final reading be set for March 9, 2026, at 6:30 p.m. The ordinance is available at the entrance of the Council Chambers, on the City's website at www.cityofdover.com under "Government," or by contacting the City Clerk's Office at 736-7008 or cityclerk@dover.de.us. A. Amending the Zoning Ordinance and Zoning Map of the City of Dover by changing the zoning designation from IL- Limited Industrial Zone and RHM - Residential Manufactured Home Zone (Kent County zoning classification) to IPM (Industrial Park Manufacturing Zone) and subject to the AEOZ (Airport Environs Overlay Zone): APZ Page 4

REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING - December 08, 2025 PAGE 5 II - Accident Potential Zone II (City of Dover zoning classification) on that property located at 1624 N Little Creek Road, consisting of 5.12 acres +/- and two unaddressed parcels of 3.15 acres +/- and 0.48 acres +/-, owned by United Worldwide Express, LLC. (Tax Parcel: ED-00-068.20-01-15.00-000, ED-00-077.00-01-07.00-000, and ED-00-077.00-01- 07.01-000; Planning Reference: AX-26-02; Second Council District) FIRST READING - The First Reading is offered on the Proposed Ordinance. Final action by Council will take place during the Second Reading on JANUARY 12, 2026. The ordinance is available at the entrance of the Council Chambers, on the City's website at www.cityofdover.com under "Government," or by contacting the City Clerk's Office at 302-736-7008 or cityclerk@dover.de.us. 25. Proposed Ordinance #2025-17 - Proposed Changes and Additions to Strengthen the Current Stormwater Ordinance by Amending Chapter 98 - Streets, Sidewalks, Storm sewers, and other public places, Article I. - In General, and Appendix F (Mark Nowak, Public Works Director) 26. Staff Substitute - Proposed Ordinance #2025-21 - Amending Chapter 106 - Traffic and Vehicles, Article III - Stopping, Standing, and Parking, by adding Sec. 106-139 - Pedestrian Safety (Councilman Anderson, David S. Hugg, III, City Manager, and Chief Johnson) CITY MANAGER’S ANNOUNCEMENTS MAYOR'S ANNOUNCEMENTS COUNCIL MEMBERS’ ANNOUNCEMENTS ADJOURNMENT THE AGENDA ITEMS AS LISTED MAY NOT BE CONSIDERED IN SEQUENCE. PURSUANT TO 29 DEL. C. §10004(e)(2), THIS AGENDA IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE TO INCLUDE THE ADDITION OR THE DELETION OF ITEMS, INCLUDING EXECUTIVE SESSIONS, WHICH ARISE AT THE TIME OF THE MEETING Page 5

Item #1. REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING The Regular City Council Meeting was held on November 24, 2025, at 6:40 p.m. with Council President Neil presiding. Council members present were Ms. Hall, Mr. Boggerty, Mr. Anderson, Dr. Pillsbury, Ms. Arndt, Mr. Rocha (via Webex), Dr. Sudler (out at 7:39 p.m.), and Mr. Lewis (out at 7:40 p.m.). Staff members present were Police Chief Johnson, Ms. Marney, Mr. Hugg, Fire Chief Carey, Mr. Griffith, and Ms. Bennett. Ms. Melson-Williams was absent. Mayor Christiansen was also present. OPEN FORUM The Open Forum was held at 6:20 p.m., prior to commencement of the Official Council Meeting. Acting Council President Hare declared the Open Forum in session and reminded those present that Council was not in official session and could not take formal action. William Faust, 136 Orchard Avenue, addressed council to express concerns regarding two (2) proposed ordinances that Mr. Anderson was advocating. The first ordinance addressed panhandling and the giving of money to individuals in need. He expressed concern that the proposed ordinance could create legal risks due to pending lawsuits and questioned what the city would gain from enacting it, noting the potential for negative publicity. He addressed Police Chief Johnson and asked whether the ordinance would be enforced even in cases where an individual was not actually in need of money. He also questioned when a Dover police officer last issued a ticket for jaywalking. Directing a comment to Mr. Anderson, he stated that the suggestion of placing “Strictly Enforced” signs under existing speed limit signs appeared to be merely a money-making tactic. He emphasized that there were appropriate ways to increase revenue, but he believed the proposed ordinance was not one (1) of them. His major concern was receiving clarification regarding questions he had emailed to Mayor Christiansen and council. He noted that only Mr. Lewis had responded and stated that Mr. Anderson had not answered his question in sufficient detail. He stated that if the ordinance passed and enforcement actions targeted the poor, and the city ultimately lost the resulting lawsuits, he wanted to know how much money would be wasted and whether council would reimburse the citizens for costs associated with frivolous and avoidable litigation. He stressed the need for the city to use its revenues wisely, noting existing issues with drugs, gun violence, and prostitution, and stating that resources should be allocated appropriately. He argued that having Dover police officers focus on removing individuals for panhandling was an unnecessary waste of resources and that their efforts would be better directed toward combating criminal activity such as drug dealing, prostitution, gun sales, and gun offenses. He also referenced the recent 10% increase in electric rates in the last budget, explaining that the increase was due to insufficient funds to replace transformers. He stated it was council’s responsibility to look out for the city’s most vulnerable residents, including individuals on Section 8, senior citizens, individuals with disabilities, and veterans. He emphasized that council often passed measures without considering how the most vulnerable residents would be able to afford essential needs, leaving some to choose between paying for food or medication. Chelle Paul, 501 Silverside Drive, addressed the council to express concerns regarding the Page 6

Item #1. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 24, 2025 PAGE 2 proposed ordinances advocated by Mr. Anderson. She directed her comments to Mr. Anderson, noting that in the proposed Ordinance #2025-21, every section contained the word “median,” except for Section B, which referred instead to “city streets.” She questioned whether the term “city streets” was intended to encompass more than just the median. She emphasized that the current ordinance appeared to suppress citizens’ rights under the First, Fourth, and Fourteenth Amendments. She stressed that if the ordinance was intended to apply to a specific area, the council needed to clearly define that area and follow proper procedures in accordance with their responsibilities. By removing the ability to enforce Title 21, they were removing the means to identify the needs of those individuals and provide the resources they would need. She emphasized that the action was effectively stripping away enforceable laws for individuals living on the streets. She directed her comments to Police Chief Johnson, asking if there was a law for public intoxication, such as individuals nodding off out on the street and in danger. She concluded that they all needed to work together so that the community would not be affected, things would be done properly, and they could help the city as opposed to harming it. Vonda Smack, 1001 White Oak Road, Apartment #F12, addressed council regarding misinformation circulating online. She directed her comments to Mr. Anderson, clarifying that the majority of bicycle incidents previously cited as “median pedestrian accidents” were inaccurate. She expressed her opposition to proposed Ordinance #2025-21, stating that it contradicted the values a community should uphold. She emphasized that the ordinance does not address safety, traffic, or homelessness issues. She shared that she had previously emailed the city suggesting a measure similar to one (1) in Newcastle, which involved placing a fence in the median to encourage the use of crosswalks, but her email went unanswered. She argued that Dover did not need additional punitive laws, but instead needed practical solutions such as affordable housing, mental health resources, expanded outreach shelters with available beds, tenant protections, and supportive services for families and returning citizens. She reminded council that they serve the citizens of Dover, many of whom are struggling, and questioned what actions would be taken to support the 455 children in Kent County experiencing homelessness. Belinda Main, 142 Reese Street, expressed her support for the individuals who spoke during the open forum. She raised concerns about speeding issues and noted that, at the last meeting she attended, she spoke with Mr. Rocha and Mr. Lewis about possible speeding solutions. She emphasized the need to find practical solutions and review the city’s budget to remove what was not essential in order to address issues for the City of Dover and for its residents. That would include the homeless, speeders, and, personally, her own children, who want to play outside and not have to think about getting hurt. She expressed opposition to the proposed Ordinance #2025- 21 directed to Mr. Anderson. She also noted that speeding occurred not only on her street but on highways where homeless individuals and those in need often sit to collect spare change. She stated that citizens have concerns that must be addressed, not just the items placed on the council’s agenda for their own purposes, but items that serve the needs of the city. She stressed that residents wanted their priorities added to the political agenda, even when others believed those concerns were unimportant. She concluded by emphasizing that citizens’ voices needed to be heard. She stated that they were being ignored and that council was not listening, and that it required effort to truly listen. James Owens, Dover resident, stated that if council was not listening, they would never learn. He Page 7

Item #1. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 24, 2025 PAGE 3 expressed concerns about individuals being fined for helping the less fortunate, noting that such actions conflicted with the core values he taught his children about helping those in need. He suggested that several empty buildings in the city could be converted into rehabilitation centers, where a large number of individuals could receive assistance, rather than trying to fit 15 to 20 individuals into small shelters. He emphasized that there were steps that the city could take to utilize those buildings for the public good. He concluded by sharing that he previously owned a clothing store on Loockerman Street, which was destroyed by a fire. He stated that he believed that the investigation was a sham. He described being brought to the police department and shown footage of the building, yet questioned why, if footage existed, there was no video from the night of the fire. He noted that he was told the cameras had not worked that night. He argued that whenever information was needed, the cameras seemed not to work, and he still does not know what happened to his building. He emphasized that he lost everything and had invested a lot of hard work in that building, yet to this day, no one (1) has explained what happened to the footage from the night of the fire, despite his having been shown other footage of the building. Cody Canasa, Dover resident, expressed that she was encouraged by the last two (2) Regular Council Meetings she had attended. She referenced scripture, stating, “Do not let your mind be troubled over what your heart allows.” She emphasized that the message was meaningful to her and expressed gratitude for being part of a passionate community, one (1) that refused to let individuals be cast aside, and she was encouraged that everyone wanted to see change and something better. She acknowledged that while everyone may disagree on the path forward, she believed that, inevitably, they all want to reach the same goal. INVOCATION The invocation was given by Elder Ellis B. Loudon. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Councilman Boggerty. ADOPTION OF AGENDA Dr. Sudler moved for adoption of the agenda, seconded by Mr. Boggerty, and carried unanimously. ADOPTION OF CONSENT AGENDA All Consent Agenda items are considered routine and non-controversial 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 requests, in which event the matter shall be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered a separate item. Mr. Lewis moved for adoption of the consent agenda, seconded by Dr. Sudler, and carried by a unanimous roll call vote. PROCLAMATION – NATIONAL HOSPICE AND PALLIATIVE CARE MONTH The City Clerk read the following Proclamation into the record: WHEREAS, during the month of November, hospice and palliative care programs across the Page 8

Item #1. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 24, 2025 PAGE 4 nation raise awareness about the compassionate care that helps patients and families live as fully as possible despite serious or life-limiting illness; and WHEREAS, hospice and palliative care providers offer the highest quality services focused on comfort and dignity, ensuring that patients facing serious illness receive care that aligns with their values and wishes; and WHEREAS, these programs bring together professionals and volunteers, including physicians, nurses, social workers, chaplains, and therapists, who provide medical, emotional, and spiritual support to patients and their loved ones; and WHEREAS, hospice and palliative care improve quality of life, reduce unnecessary hospitalizations, and provide critical assistance for families coping with end-of-life challenges and grief; and WHEREAS, the City of Dover recognizes and commends the dedicated caregivers, healthcare professionals, and volunteers who devote themselves to ensuring that our residents receive compassionate care when it is needed most; NOW, THEREFORE, I, ROBIN R. CHRISTIANSEN, MAYOR OF THE CITY OF DOVER, DELAWARE, do hereby proclaim November 2025 as NATIONAL HOSPICE AND PALLIATIVE CARE MONTH in the City of Dover and encourage all residents to increase their understanding and awareness of hospice and palliative care services and to observe this month with appropriate activities and appreciation for those who provide this essential care. On behalf of the Mayor and Council, Mayor Christiansen presented the proclamation to Elaine Pinkowski. Elaine Pinkowski, representing Compassionate Care Hospice, expressed appreciation for receiving the proclamation. She shared that it was both an honor and a pleasure to do the work they do each day, noting that she was now in her 24th year with Compassionate Care Hospice. ADOPTION OF MINUTES - REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 27, 2025 The Minutes of the Regular Council Meeting of October 27, 2025, were unanimously approved by motion of Mr. Lewis, seconded by Dr. Sudler, and bore the written approval of Mayor Christiansen. ELECTION OF OFFICERS – ROBBINS HOSE COMPANY – YEAR 2026 FIRE LINE OFFICERS The Fire Line Officers of the Robbins Hose Company are elected annually on the Third Monday of November. Members were provided the results from the November 3, 2025, Robbins Hose Company Election for consideration as follows: Fire Chief - David Carey Page 9

Item #1. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 24, 2025 PAGE 5 Deputy Fire Chief - James Iannucci First Assistant Chief - Jason Boc Second Assistant Chief - Chad Knotts Third Assistant Chief - Troy Christiansen Fourth Assistant Chief - Open First Fire Line Captain - Drew Kuntzi Second Fire Line Captain - Nikolas Senne By consent agenda, Mr. Lewis moved for acceptance of the Fire Line Officers for Robbins Hose Company No. 1 for the Year 2026, as submitted. The motion was seconded by Dr. Sudler and carried by a unanimous roll call vote. FINAL READING PROPOSED ORDINANCE #2025-18 – AMENDING CHAPTER 2 – ADMINISTRATION, ARTICLE V – FINANCE, BY ADDING SEC. 2-427 – NEW VEHICLE BILLABLE RATES The First Reading of Proposed Ordinance #2025-18 was accomplished during the Council Meeting of November 10, 2025. The Ordinance is available at the entrance of the Council Chambers or the City’s website at www.cityofdover.gov under “Government”. Ms. Arndt moved that the Final Reading of the proposed ordinance be acknowledged by title only, seconded by Ms. Hall, and unanimously carried. Mr. Jason Lyon, Director of Water and Wastewater, reviewed the Proposed Ordinance #2025-18, Amending Chapter 2 – Administration, Article V – Finance, by adding Sec. 2-427 – New Vehicle Billable Rates. By motion of Mr. Anderson, seconded by Ms. Arndt, Council, by a unanimous roll call vote, adopted Ordinance #2025-18 as follows: BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: That Chapter 2 – Administration, Article V – Finance, be amended to read as follows: Sec. 2-421. – Bond financing approval. Whenever approval of the jurisdiction where real property is situated is required as a condition of bond financing for the acquisition, operation, or renovation of real property in the city by any state or federal law prior to the approval and issuance of such bonds, no such approval shall be complete until approval is sought and granted by the city, and agreed upon and acted upon at the discretion of the council, even though approval may have been granted by the county. Sec. 2-422. – Tax increment financing, purpose, and findings. (a) The city council of the City of Dover has determined that a need exists within the city for improvements and reinvestment throughout the city. Such improvements will enhance the Page 10

Item #1. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 24, 2025 PAGE 6 taxable base of the city, directly and indirectly, encourage the development and redevelopment of commercial and residential areas of the city, increase commercial activity, increase employment, and benefit the general health and welfare of residents; and (b) The city council on February 14, 2017, passed Resolution #2017-02 supporting changes to the Delaware Code to enable Dover and Kent County to utilize the provisions of the TIF and Special District code provisions; and (c) 22 Delaware Code, Section 1703 provides "In addition to whatever other powers it may have, and notwithstanding any limitation by law, any municipality may borrow money by issuing and selling bonds, at any time and from time to time, for the purpose of financing the development of an industrial, commercial or residential area."; and (d) Delaware Code was amended to authorize the City of Dover to use the provisions of 22 Delaware Code, Chapter 17, Municipal Tax Increment Financing Act, including specific Dover provisions in 22 Del. C, Section 1716; and (e) Tax increment financing (TIF) is a financing method that allows the use of future tax revenues generated by economic development projects to help pay for the project; allows for the issuance of revenue bonds for such purposes, such bonds being tax-exempt and not a pledge of good faith or credit of the city; and by capturing the tax revenue increment between the original assessed value and the value resulting from the project; and (f) Due to the condition, age, and design of buildings and infrastructure, configuration and size of parcels, competition from commercial activities throughout the city, and other factors, the costs and complexities of development, redevelopment, and reinvestment tend to limit investment; and (g) Tax increment financing is frequently used by local governments to enable funding of certain development and infrastructure projects but the availability of alternative financing options for these projects might not occur otherwise. Sec. 2-423. – Authorization to consider issuance of tax increment financing (TIF) district bonds. (a) Before issuing bonds under the Municipal Tax Increment Financing Act, the city must designate by resolution, an area as a TIF District, obtain from the city assessor an assessment of the original assessed value in the district, create a special fund for the purpose of receiving the tax revenue increment, and comply with all other provisions of the Municipal Tax Increment Financing Act. (b) By enactment of this Ord. No. 2022-22 the city council indicates its intention to issue bonds, notes, or similar instruments in one or more series from time to time for projects and amounts to be determined in the future, prior to the bond offering, for the purposes set forth in the resolution and as allowed under Municipal Tax Increment Financing Act. Page 11

Item #1. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 24, 2025 PAGE 7 (c) "Council shall have the power by Resolution to establish terms of the bonding and financial arrangement and enter a cooperating agreement with other taxing entities such as State, County, and school districts." Sec. 2-424. Effective date. This ordinance shall be effective immediately upon final passage by the city council of the City of Dover. Passed on December 12, 2022. Sec. 2-425. Sale and disposition of real property. (a) Authorized. Except as otherwise provided and upon approval of the city council, the city manager is hereby authorized to sell or dispose of excess property. (b) Determination of excess status. The city manager, upon determining that a city owned parcel of land is excess in nature and that the disposal of such land would be beneficial to the City of Dover, will request, through the legislative, finance, and administration committee, that city council consider disposal of such land. (c) Costs of conveyance. Unless otherwise specified by the city council, all fees and costs, legal or otherwise, associated with the sale and conveyance of all excess lands shall be paid by the purchaser. (d) Standard method of disposition. (1) The legislative, finance, and administration committee, upon receiving a request to dispose of excess real property, shall, prior to making a recommendation to city council, request all pertinent information including, but not limited to, the following: a. Determination that subject parcel is not required by any other city department. b. Written explanation of why subject parcel is now surplus. c. Determination of whether a zoning change would enhance the sale value of subject parcel and recommend said change if warranted. d. Determination if the parcel's exact location and size is known and, if not, recommend whether said parcel should be surveyed by the city prior to any sale attempts. (2) City council, after receiving a positive recommendation from the legislative, finance, and administration committee to dispose of a surplus parcel of land, shall, as part of its deliberations: a. Determine if disposal of the parcel is in the city's best interests. Page 12

Item #1. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 24, 2025 PAGE 8 b. Determine if disposal by sale, gift, or some other means would best serve the city's interests. c. Determine if the city planner should be requested to initiate rezoning procedures. d. Publicize the pertinent information concerning the surplus parcel and its availability for purchase to the general public at least once a week for two weeks in a local newspaper. e. Make public, and a part of the record, all written correspondence received and, after the publicizing requirements of subsection (2)d. are met, hold a public hearing to receive any other citizen input. (3) City council, after voting to proceed with the sale of surplus land, shall determine: a. If an unbiased appraisal is needed to establish a minimum acceptable price. b. Whether to sell the parcel by public auction or by sealed bid, and what the minimum acceptable offer will be. c. The degree and scope of advertising, with a minimum of exposure being advertisement once a week for two weeks in a newspaper of general circulation within the county. d. Whether the circumstances of and surrounding a particular sale may be such that the best interests of the city would be served by listing the property for sale with a licensed real estate agent. (4) City staff shall, with city council's direction: a. Arrange for advertisement of the sale. b. Draft the sale bill setting out a description of the parcel to be sold, time, date, and place of sale or bid opening, the terms and conditions of sale, and the city's reservation of acceptance or rejection of any or all bids received at the time of sale or bid opening. c. Order and distribute a sufficient number of sale bills for posting and distribution in the county courthouse, at the site, and in the general area of the parcel. d. Obtain the services of a professional auctioneer if said sale is to be a public auction. e. Conduct the sale and submit the results to city council. f. Obtain the services of a licensed real estate agent if the sale is to be brokered. Page 13

Item #1. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 24, 2025 PAGE 9 (5) City council, after confirming the sale, shall: a. Request the city solicitor to prepare a deed for execution and to arrange for final settlement with the purchaser, at which time the city will deliver the deed, the purchaser will pay all balances due, and the city solicitor will record said deed in the Recorder of Deeds Office for Kent County. (e) Exceptions to standard method of disposition. (1) Exception A—Sale to an abutting owner. When, in the opinion of city council, a public sale would be detrimental to the lands of an abutter, and/or that a public sale would place the abutter at undue risk; or that the combination of abutter's land and city's land would be substantially greater in value than that of the sum of the parcels considered individually, city council may direct the city assessor to have prepared one or more unbiased fee appraisals of the parcel. Thereafter, the subject land will be offered for sale to the said abutter at the appraisal price, plus the appraisal fees, plus the legal costs. In the event the offer is not accepted, a public sale may be ordered. Examples of detrimental affect might be when the surplus city parcel lies between an abutting property and the street and development of the parcel would obstruct visibility of the abutter's property, or when the surplus parcel is zoned multi-family and abuts a single-family parcel. (2) Exception B—Trade of lands. Trade of lands may be approved when it is shown beyond doubt that such a trade will be equal to or better than the lands to be traded either on a "square foot for square foot" measure and/or on a "dollar for dollar" measure. (3) Exception C—Conveyance of odd shaped and/or unbuildable parcels. City acquisitions for roads, utility usages, etc. may, after such usage is accomplished, leave a small strip of land that is odd shaped and unbuildable. City council may approve the conveyance of this strip of land to an abutting property owner on request of said owner. The price for these lands shall be at the same cost basis as that paid by the city. If conveyance is made in excess of two years after the date of city acquisition, then the consideration shall either be based on a price established by an unbiased fee appraisal made on the basis of the value added to the abutting property by the acquisition of said lands, or on the city's cost basis for the parcel adjusted for inflation, whichever city council shall select. All fees, legal or otherwise, associated with the conveyance are to be paid by the purchaser. (4) Exception D—Sale of small or irregular shaped lot to an abutting owner. If any excess parcel of land is too small or irregular in shape to be of any value to anyone other than an abutting owner, it may be sold to such owner at either its fee appraised fair market value, or at its fair market value as established by the city's assessment records, whichever city council shall select. The costs of the appraisal and all legal costs shall be paid by the owner requesting the conveyance. Page 14

Item #1. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 24, 2025 PAGE 10 (5) Exception E—Donation of land to non-profit organizations. If, in the opinion of city council, the donation of a parcel of excess land to a non-profit organization would be in the best interest of the city, council then reserves unto itself the right to make such donation. Sec. 2-426. – Credit card processing fees. A credit/debit card processing fee, as provided for in Appendix F—Fees and Fines, shall be imposed for any tax, fee, fine, summons, utility bill, or any other payment made with a credit, debit, or charge card accepted by the City of Dover. Sec. 2-427. – New vehicle billable rates. At times, the City of Dover provides services that are deemed billable. When equipment is used for said billable event, the city shall utilize the most recent published schedule of equipment rates provided by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). This schedule will be calculated on an hourly basis and will not include any labor or material costs for the service. If the city utilizes a piece of equipment that is not included in the FEMA schedule of equipment rates, city staff will utilize industry standards for the hourly rate. Sections 2-428 – 2-500. Reserved. ADOPTED: November 24, 2025 FINAL READING PROPOSED ORDINANCE #2025-20 – AMENDING CHAPTER 106 – TRAFFIC AND VEHICLES, ARTICLE I – IN GENERAL, BY ADDING SEC. 106-18 – STRICTLY ENFORCED The First Reading of Proposed Ordinance #2025-20 was accomplished during the Council Meeting of November 10, 2025. The Ordinance is available at the entrance of the Council Chambers or the City’s website at www.cityofdover.gov under “Government”. Ms. Arndt moved that the Final Reading of the proposed ordinance be acknowledged by title only, seconded by Ms. Hall, and unanimously carried. Mr. David Anderson, Council member, reviewed the Proposed Ordinance #2025-20 – Amending Chapter 106 – Traffic and Vehicles, Article I – In General, By Adding Sec. 106-18 – Strictly Enforced. Responding to Mr. Anderson, Mr. Griffith clarified that there were no legal issues with Dr. Sudler’s amendment to the ordinance. He explained that the primary focus of the amendment concerned the definition of residential districts, and one of the questions they examined was whether local municipalities have the authority to establish that definition in a manner consistent with state law. He stated that, after reviewing state law, it was clear that municipalities do have the authority to define residential districts on their own. Page 15

Item #1. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 24, 2025 PAGE 11 Mr. Anderson requested unanimous consent to incorporate Dr. Sudler’s amendment into the ordinance. Mr. Neil stated that he would call for a vote based on unanimous consent. By unanimous consent, Dr. Sudler’s amendment was incorporated into the ordinance. Mr. Anderson moved to adopt Ordinance #2025-20. The motion was seconded by Mr. Boggerty. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Police Chief Johnson explained that he had spoken with Judge Wilson the previous week, and Judge Wilson indicated that he could not speak for the discretion of other judges or the deliberative factors they might consider in hearings related to speeding citations. He noted that nothing in the law prevents a conviction at the Justice of the Peace (JP) Court level for driving 26 miles per hour in a 25-mile-per-hour zone. He further explained that, due to timing devices and other variables, as well as whether the motorist has an attorney, there were several factors that influenced why officers typically did not issue citations unless a driver was traveling more than 10 miles per hour over the posted speed limit. Those factors often created reasonable doubt related to the accuracy of timing devices and other evidence that judges must weigh when determining whether to convict someone of speeding. He emphasized that nothing prohibited an officer from issuing such a citation; however, each case that went to court presented unique circumstances and may be heard by different judges, each of whom has the discretion to evaluate the evidence and any mitigating factors. He stated that he could not provide a more definitive answer about specific outcomes because the judiciary has broad discretion in that area. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Police Chief Johnson explained that, for a case to be placed on the Justice of the Peace (JP) Court docket, the violation must be converted from a city ordinance violation to a state-level offense. While that was not difficult to do, he noted that if an individual wished to contest a ticket, they could come to headquarters, where the department followed a standard process using on-duty resources to prepare the case for the docket. He stated that the department participated in what was known as the Police Prosecution Project, which allowed a supervisor to appear in court on behalf of all pending citations on the docket that day. He further explained that if a reasonable disposition could be reached between the police department and the motorists appearing in court, a series of plea bargains often occurred. That would help save the city money by reducing the need for every officer who issued a ticket to be present and on the clock to testify. He added that if they reached an impasse and a motorist requested a formal hearing, the officer who issued the citation would be called in if they were working the day shift. If the officer was not on duty, the case would be scheduled for a future date when the officer could appear. Based on his experience, he stated that only a small minority of cases go to a full hearing, as most motorists prefer to reach a disposition the same day and work out an agreement in front of the judge. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Police Chief Johnson stated that, based on his earlier comments, he does not anticipate his officers enforcing speed violations under five (5) miles per hour over the posted limit. He noted that it would fall under the concept of discretion, and if council intended to begin enforcement between one (1) and five (5) miles per hour over the limit, it would represent a new approach. As with any new ordinance or rule, the department would likely begin Page 16

Item #1. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 24, 2025 PAGE 12 with several warnings to help motorists understand the new expectations. He added that driving was habitual, and it would be unfair to change the rules abruptly without giving citizens time to adjust. He explained that the department maintained electronic records of all traffic stops. Most reasonable officers would review those records and issue warnings if a motorist had been stopped previously, particularly in the same zone. In strictly enforced zones, however, officers might need to issue citations to ensure compliance if verbal warnings proved ineffective. He added that as those cases entered the court system, the department could observe how the judges handled such offenses, which in turn informed training and enforcement practices. He noted that, even before statutory law, case law from appellate courts provided guidance, and local-level case law often favors motorists, especially at low-level speeds. Responding to Police Chief Johnson, Mr. Lewis stated that if that was the case, based on what had been discussed, then the ordinance would be frivolous. Mr. Lewis stated for the record that Police Chief Johnson’s officers typically did not pursue such cases, and those cases did not hold up in court. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Police Chief Johnson clarified that, in his conversation with Mr. Lewis, he had noted that, due to staffing shortages, officers would rarely be able to conduct speed traps or dedicated speed enforcement. He explained that this was somewhat of a subjective assessment, noting that the department utilized a rotating speed-enforcement posture based on data. He added that they were now receiving enough officers back from the academy to reassemble the motorcycle unit, which served as their traffic enforcement arm. When deployed, the unit focused on locations that have historically generated the most accidents and the highest number of violations. He noted that if someone expected officers to be present in a specific location every day, that would not be statistically possible in a city covering 24 square miles. Such enforcement represented a proactive traffic posture and was a resource-dependent activity. He explained that when census numbers or authorized strength were low, it was more difficult to maintain proactive enforcement because officers were focused on responding to 911 calls. Once staffing approached authorized levels, they would have the resources to conduct more effective enforcement and cover a wider area. He noted that enforcement priorities would change with conditions, but even at the high watermark, the department focused on covering school zones in the mornings and afternoons during the school year, as well as high-accident areas where injuries were most likely to occur. He explained that if they were to ask DelDOT, highway safety, or other partners to address traffic safety issues, every roadway would receive attention. However, given the ratio of officers to the size of the city, the coverage might not feel extensive. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Police Chief Johnson stated that the number of officers would likely change with every other Regular Council meeting. He noted that four (4) officers were nearly finished with field training, a lateral hire would begin on December 1st, and five (5) officers would start at the academy in January. He added that, assuming minimal attrition, their speed enforcement capabilities should be significantly improved by the second quarter of 2026. However, he cautioned that if there were unexpected attrition, staffing levels might remain somewhere between the current level and their optimal strength. Page 17

Item #1. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 24, 2025 PAGE 13 Responding to Mr. Lewis, Ms. Marney clarified that the cost of the signs could be covered either by the police budget, which was taxpayer-funded, or through grant funding. She cited a previous example in which grant funding was used to pay for signs when a no-smoking policy was implemented on city grounds. She added that, depending on whether the ordinance was enacted and where the signs could be placed, they would need to calculate the costs to determine the appropriate source of funding. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Ms. Marney clarified that the cost of the signs would most likely be covered by the police budget. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Police Chief Johnson explained that a moving offense was treated as a local ordinance violation, where the individual would come to police headquarters to resolve the fine with the city. He noted that mailers were sent after specific timelines, similar to any other Dover city ordinance, whether a traffic or other ordinance under city control. He added that the process was comparable to parking violations such as if no response was received after a certain number of mailings, the matter would be forwarded to collections in accordance with city financial policies. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Ms. Marney clarified that the city utilized a third-party collections agency after attempting in-house collections. If those efforts were unsuccessful, the case was referred to the third-party agency, which charged approximately 20% of the amount collected. She further noted that funding for signs was available within the Streets Division and Highway Safety budget. She added that there were different avenues for funding sources for the signs. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Ms. Marney clarified that funding could potentially be used for signage, possibly through Highway Safety, but noted that this would need to be looked into. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Ms. Marney clarified that there was no guaranteed alternative funding and that the cost of the signage would likely come from the police budget. Mr. Lewis stated that he did not believe the ordinance would have a significant impact. Regarding the cost of the signs, he felt those funds could be better used for initiatives that might make a difference, such as hiring another police officer or installing cameras on electronic speed devices. He emphasized that he could not support the ordinance. Mr. Anderson highlighted that the “strictly enforced” designation was based on Title 21, § 4169 of the Delaware Code. He explained that under that section, enforcement and the applicable penalties vary depending on how much a motorist exceeded the speed limit. For example, if a driver was traveling 50 miles per hour in a 25-mile-per-hour zone, the violation and corresponding penalty are specifically outlined in the state code. He noted that Ms. Marney was correct that street-related issues, including the purchase of signs, fall under the direction of the City Manager as stated in the ordinance, and not under the Chief of Police’s authority. He added that for other types of signs, such as speed limit signs, yield signs, stop signs, or strictly enforced signs, case law gave greater recognition to whether an individual was warned, rather than whether they were not warned. He noted that he supported the police department maintaining that discretion when evaluating an area. He personally believed that five (5) miles per hour over the limit was sufficient, but acknowledged that unusual situations could arise. He stated that he Page 18

Item #1. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 24, 2025 PAGE 14 wanted to clarify those two (2) technical areas to ensure that the discussion focused on what was actually stated in the ordinance. Dr. Sudler stated that he would like to hear from two (2) constituents who have been faithfully attending the Regular Council Meetings to share their perspectives on the proposed ordinance and its potential impact on the community. Belinda Main, 142 Reese Street, stated that motorists were unlikely to heed signs marked “Strictly Enforced” or “STOP.” She suggested that stronger enforcement measures than signage were needed, rather than relying on signs at every location. Responding to Dr. Sudler, Ms. Main stated that the ordinance would not be effective because signs alone cannot direct or control traffic. She noted that traffic could be controlled if there were more “STOP” signs in certain areas or if traffic patterns were changed, but simply posting a sign stating “Strictly Enforced” would have no real impact. Ms. Hall stated that, given the resources required for enforcement, those funds could be better used exploring options that created physical barriers to slow traffic. She noted that she would be more amenable to supporting measures that addressed that strategically, as it would represent a better use of funds. Ms. Arndt acknowledged the limited ability to enforce the ordinance and expressed appreciation for the nuances in Police Chief Johnson’s responses. She stated that signs do contribute to public awareness, noting that individuals perceive signs differently. From a public awareness perspective, she recognized that signs have a limited effect on changing driver behavior in certain circumstances, and some drivers may ignore them. However, she noted that she had no opposition to the ordinance, describing it as fairly benign. She added that the proposed sign would simply be placed under an existing speed limit sign, and if it could help even slightly, it would be beneficial and would not cause any harm. Mr. Lewis stated for the record that he agreed with Ms. Main’s comments 100%. He noted that if the proposal involved speed cameras or dips in the road, which would prevent or have repercussions for individuals exceeding the speed limit in those neighborhoods, he would fully support it. He added that if the proposal involved hiring another police officer to assist with enforcement, since Police Chief Johnson had indicated staffing limitations, he would also support that. He emphasized that Ms. Main raised valid points regarding the proposed ordinance and expressed a desire to see measures that were more cumbersome and useful to stop the speeders. Responding to Police Chief Johnson, Mr. Lewis stated that after the meeting, he could show photos and videos of vehicles speeding through his neighborhood. He noted that he has a camera in front of his house that captures how quickly vehicles travel down his street. He added that, despite the presence of 25-mile-per-hour speed limit signs and an electronic speed-monitoring system, he was uncertain how a “Strictly Enforced” sign would have any meaningful impact. Mr. Anderson raised an objection, stating that the open forum had already concluded. Page 19

Item #1. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 24, 2025 PAGE 15 Responding to Mr. Neil, Mr. Anderson clarified that, while other individuals had been invited, Ms. Main was specifically invited by a member of the Council. Mr. Anderson called the question, stating that it was time to go into a vote because the time had come to decide on the particular issue. Mr. Neil stated that residents had asked for help, and that the ordinance was at least a gesture toward providing that help. He added that saying it would not help was incorrect, because it was something actionable that officers could enforce when resources were available. He also noted that if an individual were stopped, they would have to appear in court. Even if the case were ultimately dismissed, the requirement to take time off and appear before a judge to explain the circumstances would still have an impact. He pointed out that having to sit in court for an offense, even if an individual may have committed only occasionally, had an impact. When an individual must wait in a long line of cases and explain to a judge why they are there, it has a deterrent effect. He added that if someone believed that it had no impact, they are mistaken. Therefore, if an officer issued a citation marked “Strictly Enforced,” it would carry more weight, because it would lead to a court appearance and, in itself, served as a form of enforcement. He added that if an individual had to appear in court and spend their time going through that process, that alone served as sufficient punishment. Mr. Lewis moved to suspend the rules to allow public comment. The motion was seconded by Dr. Sudler. Ms. Arndt called for a point of order, noting that once the request was made to call the question, that request took precedence. Responding to Ms. Arndt, Mr. Griffith stated that if the request has already been made to call the question, the question has been called. Responding to Ms. Arndt, Mr. Griffith clarified that under Robert’s Rules of Order, once the question has been called, the question has been called. Mr. Neil stated that Mr. Griffith had called for the roll to be taken. Responding to Ms. Hall, Ms. Bennett clarified that they were voting on Ordinance #2025-20. Dr. Sudler stated that prior to the call for the question, individuals were not allowed to have a discussion about the ordinance. He pointed out that after the call for the question was made, council was supposed to allow individuals to have a discussion. For the record, he stated that once a motion was made, a discussion should have been made. He added that a call for the question applied only to the vote on the items, but did not allow to have individuals and members of council to have a discussion. He noted for future reference that anytime a call for the question or a second to the motion, they needed to allow for discussion. As in this instance, discussion was not allowed, and because of that, he believed that stifling the voice of the community, he could not support the proposed ordinance. Page 20

Item #1. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 24, 2025 PAGE 16 By motion of Mr. Anderson, seconded by Mr. Boggerty, Council, by a roll call vote of six (6) yes (Boggerty, Anderson, Pillsbury, Arndt, Rocha, Neil) and three (3) no (Hall, Sudler, Lewis), adopted Ordinance #2025-20 as follows: BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: That Chapter 106 – Traffic and Vehicles, Article I – In General, be amended as follows: Sec. 106-18. – Strictly Enforced (a) Residential district speed limits shall be consistent with Title 21, Chapter 41, §4169 and be strictly enforced. {For purposes of this section, “residential district” shall mean any area designated and posted as a residential speed zone on public roadways maintained by the City. This section shall not apply to private driveways, parking lots, or property not constituting a public roadway. Enforcement shall apply only to traffic movement and operation occurring on the vehicular travel portion of public streets.} (1) This section applies exclusively to public roadways, intersections, medians, shoulders, and vehicular travel lanes under the jurisdiction of the City of Dover. (2) This section does not apply to or authorize enforcement upon public sidewalks, private property, private roads, private communities, parking areas, or driveways. (3) Enforcement authority is confined strictly to the public right-of-way intended for vehicular travel. No enforcement shall occur outside such areas. (b) The City Manager shall cause proper signage announcing strict enforcement in residential neighborhoods to be placed in accordance with state law. {Such signage shall be installed only on public rights-of-way under the City’s jurisdiction and shall comply with all requirements of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). No signage shall be placed on private property without the owner's consent.} (c) Penalties. Whoever violates this section shall be fined as provided for in Appendix F – Fees and Fines. {Any enforcement under this section shall be limited to conduct occurring on public streets or highways within the City of Dover and shall be applied in a viewpoint-neutral, non-discriminatory manner consistent with the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution and applicable Page 21

Item #1. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 24, 2025 PAGE 17 provisions of the Delaware Constitution.} This ordinance shall take effect on the first day of July after passage and approval. Secs. 106-19 – 106-50. – Reserved. BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED: That Appendix F – Fees and Fines, be amended by inserting the text indicated in bold, blue font as follows: Chapter 106. – Traffic and Vehicles Chapter 106. Traffic and Vehicles Fees and Fines Article I. In General 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. Sec. 106-7. Obedience to state law; violation of any provision of 21 A fine of not less Del. C. § 101 et seq. (except Sec. 106-7(1)—Handicapped parking and than $25.00, nor Sec. 106-7(2)—Fire lanes) more than $1,000.00 Subsec. (1) Handicapped parking Minimum fine, as defined in 21 Del. C. § 4183, at the time the violation occurs Subsec. (2) Fire lanes Minimum fines, as defined in 21 Del. C.§ 7001(a), at the time the violation occurs Sec. 106-14. Off-road motor vehicle regulations Subsec. (d) Penalties A minimum fine of $25.00 and a maximum fine of $100.00 Sec. 106-15. Failure to stop for a red traffic signal; traffic light signal violation monitoring program; penalties Subsec. (b)(3) Traffic light signal violation monitoring program; civil or administrative assessment Failure to comply with a traffic light signal $75.00 Page 22

Item #1. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 24, 2025 PAGE 18 If not paid within 14 days, an additional assessment shall be $10.00 added to the original assessment Additional assessment shall be increased if the assessment is not $20.00 paid within 45 days Additional assessment shall be increased if the assessment is not $30.00 paid within 90 days Court costs or similar administrative fees may also be assessed if Maximum $30.00 the owner requests a hearing to contest the violation, and is ultimately found to be in violation or fails to pay or contest the violation in a timely manner Sec. 106-16. Violations; except as otherwise provided Subsec. (a)(1) Moving offense Minimum of $10.00 Subsec. (a)(2) Nonmoving offense Minimum of $15.00 Subsec. (a)(3) Parking violation $20.00 for each offense, if the fine is paid within 72 hours from the date the offense is recorded in time, the fine shall be $15.00 Sec. 106-18. Strictly Enforced As defined in 21 Del. C.§ 4169, at the time the violation occurs ADOPTED: November 24, 2025 Mr. Anderson stated that he was waiting for the vote on the point of order. He noted that part of the question applied in the debate, and therefore, no further discussion was needed. He added that it was the opposite of what Dr. Sudler had stated. CITY MANAGER'S ANNOUNCEMENTS Mr. Hugg had no announcements. MAYOR’S ANNOUNCEMENTS Mayor Christiansen announced that the Home for the Holidays Celebration will take place on December 4th from 5:00 to 8:00 p.m. He noted that several events will be held that evening, including one (1) of the premier events featuring council singing. He also highlighted another premier holiday event in Downtown Dover, the Dashing Through Downtown Dover Parade, which will be held on December 13th, beginning at 5:30 p.m. He concluded by wishing everyone a Happy Thanksgiving. COUNCIL MEMBERS' ANNOUNCEMENTS Mr. Lewis wished everyone a Happy Thanksgiving and reminded everyone not to forget those in Page 23

Item #1. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 24, 2025 PAGE 19 the community who were suffering, disadvantaged, or living on the streets. He encouraged everyone to get involved with local shelters and volunteer their time. He added that this applied not only to individuals but also to animals, noting that the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SPCA) offered a program where individuals could feed the animals on Thanksgiving. He concluded by urging everyone to keep their hearts open during the holiday season. Dr. Sudler announced that the Mayor’s Blue Ribbon OUD Task Force is planning its first outreach initiative to assist individuals off the medians through peer support staff and partners, including the Downtown Dover Partnership (DDP) and the Dover Human Relations Commission (DHRC). He noted that the state has now joined the effort, providing additional resources to help transition individuals off the medians and connect them to services that can assess their external challenges and provide needed support. He added that they are looking forward to a productive outreach initiative and encouraged any individuals or organizations interested in helping to contact the Mayor’s Office, as they welcome everyone’s assistance. Mr. Boggerty announced that on Thanksgiving morning, from 8:00 to 10:00 a.m., he, along with the World Church Omega Psi Phi Silent Chapter, Omega Psi Phi Fraternity Incorporated, 100 Black Men of Delaware, and a partnering catering company, will be providing breakfast to 200 individuals. He expressed gratitude to those who have already donated. The breakfast will be carry-out only and will be distributed at 300 Loockerman Street, the future home of the Well Life Center. Mr. Anderson stated that he fully supported Dr. Sudler’s efforts in organizing the outreach initiative. He announced that Small Business Saturday will take place on Saturday, November 29th, at The Hive on Loockerman from 10:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. He noted that artisans and other businesses will participate, offering the public unique experiences with local creators and the opportunity to purchase special Christmas gifts. He encouraged everyone to come out to support their local community and keep their dollars local. He added that the Downtown Dover Partnership (DDP) has received a grant that allowed the public to purchase gift cards that could only be used at downtown businesses. He encouraged everyone to buy and use those gift cards to further support the downtown community. He also announced that Dashing Through Downtown Dover will be held on December 13th, beginning at 6:00 p.m., and that registration was now open. He urged anyone interested in participating to register. He noted that this would also be one (1) of the final opportunities to donate to Toys for Tots, with donations accepted until December 13th. He reminded everyone that many young individuals in the community may not have gifts to receive for Christmas and emphasized the importance of supporting Toys for Tots, adding that the Salvation Army also does a wonderful job serving families in need. He encouraged citizens to attend the Council Committee of the Whole Meeting on November 25th, where important ordinances, including those related to pedestrian safety, will be discussed. He expressed gratitude to the many individuals who have shown support, acknowledging that the community recognized the seriousness of those issues, not only in Dover but across Delaware. He thanked those who contacted him through social media, the news stories, next door, and through petitions. He emphasized that it was vital for the community to take a stand, do what was right for all citizens, preventing harm and harassment, and help restore a sense of community. Page 24

Item #1. CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 24, 2025 PAGE 20 Ms. Hall expressed gratitude to Reverend Loudon for setting the tone and tempo in Council Chambers, noting that his words encouraged and uplifted everyone at the start of the meeting. She then addressed Ms. Canasa, expressing her appreciation for her willingness to come forward during public comment, emphasizing that the spirit of the chamber should be one (1) of constructive conversation. She added that while members do not always agree, they must work together to find common solutions. She also addressed Ms. Main, acknowledging that they do not always see eye to eye, but expressed her love for her and gratitude for her attendance at the meeting. She encouraged everyone to embrace a spirit of gratitude during Thanksgiving, recognizing that some members of the community were less fortunate. Finally, she announced that a local business will begin a new tradition, “Friendsgiving,” at 329 Loockerman Street with Al Nore, providing meals to residents between 11:00 a.m. and 2:00 p.m. The meeting adjourned at 7:45 p.m. ANDRIA L. BENNETT CITY CLERK All ordinances, resolutions, motions, and orders adopted by the City Council during their Regular Meeting of November 24, 2025, are hereby approved. ROBIN R. CHRISTIANSEN MAYOR /AB Page 25

Item #2. COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE The Council Committee of the Whole met on November 25, 2025, at 6:00 p.m. with Council President Neil presiding. Members of Council present were Mr. Anderson, Ms. Arndt, Mr. Boggerty, Ms. Hall (arrived at 6:07 p.m.), Mr. Lewis (arrived at 6:15 p.m., joined via WebEx at 10:53 p.m.), Dr. Pillsbury, Mr. Rocha (via WebEx), and Dr. Sudler. Mayor Christiansen was also present (arrived at 7:50 p.m.). Civilian members present for their Committee meetings were Dr. Jackson, Ms. Smack (Safety, Advisory, and Transportation), Dr. Iriowen, and Mr. Wilson (Utility), Mr. Garfinkel, and Ms. Shevock (Legislative, Finance, and Administration). ADOPTION OF AGENDA Ms. Arndt moved for adoption of the agenda, seconded by Dr. Pillsbury and unanimously carried. Council Reports – October 2025 First District Dr. Pillsbury reported attending the Veterans Day Commemoration as well as serving lunch at the Salvation Army. Mr. Rocha had nothing to report. Second District Ms. Hall was absent; no report was given. Mr. Lewis was absent: no report was given. Third District Ms. Arndt advised that she would be submitting her report electronically. Fourth District Mr. Anderson reported having several meetings with constituents regarding problems with crime and Neighborhood Watch meetings. He reported attending separate meetings with constituents along with Council President Neil and Ms. Hall. Lastly, he reported attending a positive meeting with the National League of Cities and that there would be good information in the forthcoming months. Dr. Sudler reported additional trash dumping near Lincoln Street, close to Ms. Main, as well as overgrowth around utility wires on Conwell Street near Mr. and Mrs. Haith’s unit. He further reported speeding issues on College Road and traffic concerns on Saulsbury Road between 2:00 p.m. and 5:00 p.m. At-Large Mr. Boggerty reported meeting with the Boys and Girls Club regarding their new center and emphasizing accessibility to the youth. He explained that it will have transportation, an EA Sports Page 26

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING NOVEMBER 25, 2025 PAGE 2 Item #2. gaming area, media components for music and arts, and a sports area. He reported that he recently represented the City of Dover on a panel at Delaware State University discussing the structure and function of local government. He served alongside Councilwoman At-Large Latisha Bracy of the City of Wilmington, and together they shared how their respective councils are addressing current issues. He noted that approximately sixty young attendees asked insightful questions, and the panel emphasized the importance of voting in local elections, understanding the issues, and avoiding strictly partisan decision-making. Council President Neil Council President Neil reported attending the Peace Pole dedication at Congregation Beth Shalom along with the members of the Unitarian Universalists. He attended the Silver Lake Commission presentation on the St. Jones River and the Habitat for Humanity’s Charity Ball at Bally's Casino. He reported attending a meeting at the Levy Court sponsored by Senator Buckson and Representative Kerry Evelyn Harris regarding manufactured homes and available assistance. He met with the Mayor and the Police Chief on various matters. He further reported attending the November Library Board meeting, as well as a meeting with the group working to advance the Dover Ice Rink and Civic Center project at Schutte Park, along with Councilman Rocha and Councilwoman Pillsbury. He attended the Wild Meadows Homeowners Association meeting and the dedication of a Habitat for Humanity home at 145 Ann Street. He also responded by email and telephone to numerous inquiries regarding the proposed traffic and safety ordinance scheduled for discussion that evening. He submitted a staff review amendment to Chapter 66 concerning manufactured homes, requiring that titles be provided to the City before a license is issued for homes brought into the community. He noted that used homes had been brought into leased-land communities and sold without the required title under state law, making them difficult to sell legally by subsequent owners. He thanked Eddie Kopp, Chief Code Enforcement Officer, for the adopted changes that would be forthcoming at a future meeting. He met several times with Councilman Anderson and Councilwoman Hall, along with concerned citizens, regarding issues related to individuals who commit acts against society but are not held accountable and may be unable to help themselves. He provided a letter of congratulations to Zeta Phi Beta on their 50th anniversary. He referred a Dover resident, James Branch, to the staff regarding concerns about water pollution, noting the matter was more appropriate for state review. He also acknowledged receipt of a petition for sidewalk repairs in the Dover Historic District and reported that Public Works Director Nowak was seeking funding for a contractor to complete the work. SAFETY, ADVISORY, AND TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE The Safety, Advisory, and Transportation Committee met with Chairman Boggerty presiding. Adoption of Agenda Dr. Pillsbury moved for adoption of the agenda, seconded by Ms. Hall and unanimously carried. Page 27

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING NOVEMBER 25, 2025 PAGE 3 Item #2. Quarterly Briefing on Dover/Kent County Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) Projects (Marilyn Smith, Executive Director of the Dover/Kent MPO) Ms. Marilyn Smith, Executive Director of the Dover/Kent MPO, reviewed the background and analysis regarding the Dover/Kent County MPO Projects. This item was informational; committee action was not required. Mr. Rocha explained that his earlier comments regarding the need for a comprehensive plan were directed primarily toward DelDOT rather than the MPO. He stated that the intent was to examine long-term traffic relief strategies as the City continues to grow, similar to how other municipalities, such as Middletown, have developed connector routes to major highways like 301. He acknowledged the valuable studies already completed, such as those related to Saulsbury Road and Kenton Road, but emphasized the importance of continued education and planning for Council to make informed transportation decisions. He added that he anticipates the MPO’s assistance in this effort and expressed interest in participating in a future workshop. Ms. Arndt thanked Ms. Smith for the work that she and her team do. She also thanked Ms. Smith for applying for the safety grant on behalf of the city. She also expressed interest in participating in a future workshop. Responding to Mr. Neil, Ms. Smith stated that she does have a rolling two-year pave and rehab list from DelDOT. She noted that she would check the list for Persimmon Park Place Road and share his request with DelDOT. Responding to Ms. Smack, Ms. Smith stated that part of the Kent County Comprehensive Safety Action Plan is a series of proven safety countermeasures, and it includes the fence treatments as mentioned. Ms. Smith noted that their process is to look at the places along the high injury network and assess what the best proven safety countermeasure is for that area is and what the funding opportunities are to make the changes. Ms. Smith asked that Ms. Smack send her the areas of concern so that they can look at the specific corridors and road sections. Responding to Ms. Smack, Ms. Smith stated that the high injury network analysis where pedestrian fatalities have occurred and the major areas. She referenced the Kent County Comprehensive Safety Action Plan map and noted that the lines and dots are the twenty-nine intersections and the twenty-four corridors in Dover that have the highest incidence of fatality or serious injuries during the crash data period. Responding to Mr. Anderson, Ms. Smith stated that she has talked to Linda Parkowski at Kent Economic Partnership and explained that the MPO is waiting on the city and the county to decide what parcels are going to be prioritized in the Dover Air Cargo Freight development. Responding to Mr. Anderson, Ms. Smith stated that East/West Freight Routes Phase 2 was completed. She noted that there were a couple of recommendations that she believed included new construction and a build-out of the interchange at either North Little Creek Road or South Little Creek Road. Page 28

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING NOVEMBER 25, 2025 PAGE 4 Item #2. Responding to Mr. Anderson, Ms. Smith stated that once they have finished their studies and they have project recommendations, they put them into the short, mid, and long-term plan, then every two years they try to get those projects into the Capital Transportation Program (CTP). Therefore, that recommendation will be part of the advocacy for the next round of projects. Responding to Dr. Sudler, Ms. Smith stated that she is not sure how the McKee Road corridor improvements compare against projects submitted in New Castle or Sussex County because she is not part of the process. However, she noted that it was a high priority for the city, which made it number one on the project list. She explained that when they do a prioritization process, it includes elements like traffic, safety, items on the high injury network, and economic development, which are then weighted, and it scored really high compared to other projects. Responding to Dr. Sudler, Ms. Smith stated that the Rail Corridor Land Use study shows a rail corridor running along the peninsula, with some compatible uses nearby. However, some uses are not compatible; for example, building houses twenty-five feet from the rail corridor is incompatible. She noted that the MPO encourages municipalities with parcels zoned residential next to the rail to reconsider their zoning, as it is not suitable. She clarified that the study does not address roads but focuses on preserving the corridor for rail-supported industry and promoting the rail itself as an economic development tool. Responding to Dr. Sudler, Ms. Smith stated that she would have to see the exact location because, generally speaking, the Federal Railroad and DelDOT do not like to add new crossings. If a crossing needed to be added to get to a residential community, they would not look favorably at that. Responding to Ms. Smack, Ms. Smith stated that off the top of her head, some recommendations would be considering crosswalks, lighting, channelization, and figuring out how to get people where they should be, and discouraging them from going where they should not be. She noted that the fencing that Ms. Smack had previously mentioned was a good recommendation. She explained that they have been looking at rapid flashing beacons and addressing concerns like accessing what it looks like to be a walker and seeing cars, and how cars can see a walker. Responding to Dr. Sudler, Ms. Smith noted that it is not her place to speak for DelDOT; however, they have had some conversations regarding pedestrians on the medians. She noted that the medians are there for a reason. Whether it be to channelize traffic, placeholders for signage, or because utilities are running underneath them. Using Route 13 as an example, she stated that when there are three lanes of traffic in each direction and two turning lanes, people need a refuge when crossing those lanes. People need a place to be safe when they traverse all those lanes of traffic. Responding to Dr. Sudler, Ms. Smith stated that she does not recall off the top of her head whether there were any cases of individuals who have been walking up and down the medians and have been injured. Responding to Ms. Hall, Ms. Smith stated that broadly, their office can address some signage issues. She noted that the new Camden bypass is being constructed under the Safe Streets guidance. Therefore, anywhere there is a pedestrian crossing or bike crossing, there will be “modern refuges” Page 29

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING NOVEMBER 25, 2025 PAGE 5 Item #2. that allow space and signage that are clear about where people can stop, stand, or park. She also noted that looking at a different location, many of them are older infrastructure that have not had a redo in a while, and the median is small and not at the same standard. They have the opportunity to be better, but they have also been around a long time. Responding to Ms. Hall, Ms. Smith stated that she is not familiar with who is responsible for the cost of city signage, but she could find out. LaChelle Paul, a Dover resident, questioned whether Ms. Smith was able to provide how many pedestrians on the medians or people on bikes were injured. Responding to Ms. Paul, Ms. Smith stated that, off the top of her head, she could not provide that information. She noted that the data was included in the Kent County Comprehensive Safety Action Plan, which was on the Dover/Kent MPO website. She explained that if someone scrolls down to the section that outlines the map, they would be able to see the data analysis of all the fatalities and serious injuries. She also noted that the data is available on the DelDOT website and DelDOT updates the safety information weekly. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Ms. Smith stated that the SS4A grant works in a cyclical fashion, meaning that they cannot apply to complete a project or apply to build something unless they already have a safety action plan that outlines the project that they are wanting to do in the higher injury network. She explained that is the reason that the MPO did a countywide safety action plan so that any municipality that had a location in the high injury network could take that and apply for federal funds to implement. She stated that the City of Dover declined to apply for an implementation grant on any of the locations that were called out on the high injury network, but she could not speculate as to why. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Ms. Smith stated that DelDOT has information regarding fatalities, and that information was used to develop the map. Responding to Dr. Jackson, Ms. Smith stated that all federal grant opportunities are under review. She stated that when they submitted the grant, they were told they may be announced around spring. Responding to Dr. Jackson, Ms. Smith stated that the purpose would be to do a deeper dive, focusing on the high injury network on the US13 corridor, block by block, intersection by intersection. Responding to Dr. Jackson, Ms. Smith stated that based on the results of the study, they would be able to identify solutions to prevent injury. Responding to Dr. Sudler, Mr. Hugg noted that a vast majority of the red dots are located on state- owned, state-maintained roads. He explained that the city would not apply for funds to make improvements to a state-owned and maintained area. He further explained that the studies are outside the scope of the citys abilities and the decision was made because the engineers are backed up doing water and wastewater projects. He noted that in making the decision it was established Page 30

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING NOVEMBER 25, 2025 PAGE 6 Item #2. that the work was outside of the citys scope and a lot of the work has to be done on state roads which would be inappropriate for the city to take initiative on. Prioritization of City of Dover State Capital Transportation Program (CTP) Projects (David S. Hugg, III, City Manager) Mr. David S. Hugg, III, City Manager, reviewed the background and analysis regarding the City of Dover State Capital Transportation Program. Staff recommended approval of the 2025 transportation priorities. Responding to Mr. Boggerty, Mr. Hugg stated that not a lot of the projects would be covered under the state's Community Transportation Fund (CTF) given to the city because they are higher-level roads. He explained that the money that the city receives from the legislators helps fix local roads, and he does not typically ask the state to give the city CTF money to spend on a state road. The purpose of the CTF money is to help communities maintain a hundred-plus miles of road that the city owns. He noted that the city spends CTF money on the local roads, and they rely on the state and MPO to find funding for major improvements to state and major city roads. Responding to Mr. Boggerty, Mr. Hugg stated that there is a list of approximately six roads that were submitted to the legislators for use of CTF money in the City of Dover on a variety of streets that need rebuilding, repaving, and drainage improvements. Responding to Mr. Boggerty, Mr. Hugg stated that once they are approved, they can identify the roads and list them on the website. He noted that they will also go through a public notice process when they select a design or construction firm to do the work. Responding to Mr. Rocha, Mr. Hugg stated that College Road has consistently been identified by the city as a priority. To the best of his recollection, the priorities in that area were Route 8, Kenton Road, and College Road. He explained that College Road is on DelDOT's list of projects, but without looking at the funding cycle, he is unsure when it is scheduled to be completed. He noted that College Road is a bit unusual in that it is relatively narrow, and the right-of-way is not very wide; therefore, it will be a bit more difficult from a design standpoint. Responding to Mr. Rocha, Mr. Hugg stated that sidewalks will be a part of the College Road redevelopment or redesign. Much like the Kenton Road project, it will include sidewalks, pathways, and bike lanes as a part of the Safe Roads planning process. Responding to Mr. Rocha, Mr. Hugg stated that he did not prioritize the individual categories, only the roads within them. Responding to Mr. Anderson, Mr. Hugg stated that he would have to provide additional information on the sidewalks at Dover High School. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Mr. Hugg stated that generally, the funding is limited to transportation improvements. He noted that some things, like cameras and sign improvements, can be included Page 31

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING NOVEMBER 25, 2025 PAGE 7 Item #2. in the Highway Safety Study. He stated he can look into speed cameras and see if they would potentially be covered under the funding. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Mr. Hugg stated that there are a number of project areas within DelDOT that are not included in the process. DelDOT has an ongoing paving program and safety program, which may have funding available. He noted that there is no federal funding through Homeland Security or the Department of Emergency and Military Affairs (DEMA), but he would check with DelDOT. Mr. Anderson moved to recommend approving the staff recommendation. The motion was seconded by Ms. Hall and carried with Ms. Arndt abstaining. Mr. Boggerty moved for adjournment of the Safety Advisory and Transportation Committee meeting, hearing no objection the meeting adjourned at 7:14 p.m. UTILITY COMMITTEE The Utility Committee met with Chairman Rocha presiding. Adoption of Agenda Mr. Neil moved for adoption of the agenda, seconded by Dr. Pillsbury and unanimously carried. Evaluation of Bids – Security Fence Replacement of the Water Treatment Plant (Jason Lyon, Water & Wastewater Director) Mr. Jason Lyon, Director of Water and Wastewater, reviewed the background and analysis of the evaluation of bids for the security fence replacement of the Water Treatment Plant. Staff recommended awarding the contract to Pierce Fence Company for the Security Fence Replacement for the Water Treatment Plant, Bid #26-0006WW, for the amount of $216,650.00. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Mr. Lyon stated that he could not speak for all departments, but the Water and Wastewater Department has used them for repairs. He explained that they have also been the fence company that has done numerous projects inside the city limits for private fences throughout the area. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Mr. Lyon stated that they submitted a local vendor preference, so their evaluated price is lower. He explained that the city does not receive a discount, nor does the vendor; the price evaluated is lower. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Mr. Lyon stated that $210,000 includes a three percent reduction. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Mr. Lyon stated that they follow the procurement policy for the City of Dover; it is not a specific department protocol. He explained that the policy is that if they receive one bid on a project, they may reach out, but if they receive five bids on a project, it would not be Page 32

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING NOVEMBER 25, 2025 PAGE 8 Item #2. equitable or fair if they did not hold everyone to the same standard to provide the information on the right date and time. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Mr. Lyon stated that the two companies from Pennsylvania did not meet the deadline. He also confirmed that the protocol is not to reach out to the companies. Responding to Dr. Iriowen, Mr. Lyon stated that he has no concern with the company and that their quality of work is good. Dr. Sudler moved to recommend awarding the contract to Pierce Fence Company for the security fence replacement for the water treatment plant, Bid #26-0006WW, for the amount of $216,650.00. The motion was seconded by Dr. Pillsbury. Bobby Wilson, 32 West Loockerman Street, Dover, questioned how small contractors can be awarded the proposed type of project. Responding to Mr. Wilson, Mr. Lyon stated that, unfortunately, the requirement for subcontracting is not a requirement for the City of Dover. He noted that they reached out through the Office of Supplier Diversity for fencing contractors, which is a category that can be found on their website, and they solicited from them. As far as subcontracting goes, that is up to the prime contractor to make that decision. Responding to Mr. Wilson, Mr. Lyon stated that it is a city policy for procurement, and if there needs to be a change, then it must be made citywide. Responding to Mr. Wilson, Mr. Lyon stated he has no opposition to mandatory pre-bid meetings. He emphasized that the requirement is not a Department of Water and Wastewater issue; it is a City of Dover procurement issue, therefore, he cannot speak on behalf of the entire city. He noted that his department goes above and beyond the procurement policy to reach out to all of the people who are on the Office of Supplier Diversity list that are registered through the state. He explained that there may be an issue with people coming from out of state to a mandatory pre-bid meeting for projects that are extremely complex. If they do not attend the mandatory pre-bid meeting, then they cannot bid on the project. Dr. Sudler moved to recommend that, within sixty days, the Procurement Department, at a committee meeting, brief council on the process, what is needed to make the proper adjustment for the mandatory pre-bid meeting, and have an open discussion so that small contractors can come forth and participate in the process. The motion was seconded by Ms. Hall and unanimously carried. Dr. Sudler moved to recommend awarding the contract to Pierce Fence Company for the security fence replacement for the water treatment plant, Bid #26-0006WW, for the amount of $216,650.00. The motion was seconded by Dr. Pillsbury and unanimously carried. Page 33

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING NOVEMBER 25, 2025 PAGE 9 Item #2. Evaluation of Bids – Pump Station #7 Upgrades (Jason Lyon, Water & Wastewater Director) Mr. Jason Lyon, Director of Water and Wastewater, reviewed the background and analysis of the evaluation of bids for the Pump Station #7 upgrades. Staff recommended awarding the contract to A-Del Construction for the Pump Station #7 Upgrades project, Bid #26-0008WW, for the amount of $636,548.00. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Mr. Lyon stated that the project was budgeted for $680,000, and the award is $636,548. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Mr. Lyon stated that eventually, all of the pump stations would flow to the county. Pump Station #7 is one of the large ones that feeds directly to the county. There is a network of pump stations that run in parallel or a series effect, where they go into another pump station and another, and eventually discharge to the county. Pump Station #7 discharges directly into the county. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Mr. Lyon stated that in the past, with certain projects, they have asked the county if they would compensate the city. However, that particular station has a granulated activated carbon filter to decrease the odor of the pump station due to its location with regard to the Route 13 corridor, and the county has agreed to assist with that cost. He noted that the costs of the project are for ongoing maintenance and improvements to make the station function more appropriately. He noted that they had not specifically asked if the county would compensate the city for the project. Ms. Hall moved to recommend accepting the staff recommendation to award the contract to A-Del Construction for the Pump Station #7 upgrades project. The motion was seconded by Dr. Sudler. Responding to Mr. Wilson, Mr. Lyon stated that the local vendor preference is broken into three different categories. If they are in the city limits, they get first priority, if they are in the county, they get second priority, and if they are in the state, they get third priority. A-Del is located in Newark, and the other company is located in Maryland. They were provided with the local vendor preference before the first two were not hit. Ms. Hall moved to recommend accepting the staff recommendation to award the contract to A-Del Construction for the Pump Station #7 upgrades project. The motion was seconded by Dr. Sudler and unanimously carried. Mr. Rocha moved for adjournment of the Utility Committee meeting, hearing no objection the meeting adjourned at 7:46 p.m. LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE The Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee met with Chairman Anderson presiding. Adoption of Agenda Page 34

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING NOVEMBER 25, 2025 PAGE 10 Item #2. Mr. Shevock moved for adoption of the agenda, seconded by Dr. Pillsbury and unanimously carried. Evaluation of Bids – Fiscal Year 2026 Street & Alley Program (Jason Lyon, Water & Wastewater Director) Mr. Jason Lyon, Director of Water and Wastewater, reviewed the background and analysis of the Fiscal Year 2026 Street and Alley Program. Staff recommended awarding the contract to Grassbusters Landscaping Co. Inc., for the City of Dover FY 2026 Street and Alley Program, Bid #26-0007WW, for the amount of $874,256.00. Responding to Mr. Garfinkel, Mr. Lyon stated that there are reconstruction categories. The term rehabilitation is used because some of the projects are doing things that others are not doing. He noted that the projects do not necessarily equate to the category that is in the software package. There are multiple categories based on software programs, like reconstruction, rehabilitation, and maintenance. Responding to Mr. Garfinkel, Mr. Lyon stated that the team members went out and evaluated Bicentennial Boulevard some years ago, and it was found to be in a condition that needed to be rehabilitated. Responding to Mr. Garfinkel, Mr. Lyon stated that the software takes into account vehicle traffic as well as the type of road it is, which changes the scoring. Responding to Mr. Garfinkel, Mr. Lyon noted that Bicentennial Boulevard is under reconstruction along with approximately one hundred and fifty-six other streets. Mr. Garfinkel expressed concerns about the system used to evaluate the streets. Mr. Wilson recommended using DelDOT’s civil rights agenda to set aspirational goals for the projects. Responding to Mr. Wilson, Mr. Lyon stated that certain projects that receive federal funding do require a percentage of the project to be solicited to Minority Business Enterprise (MBE), Women’s Business Enterprise (WBE), and Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE). Responding to Ms. Paul, Mr. Anderson stated that the city solicits from the State of Delaware Supplier Diversity list to ensure that minority contracts have a role. Responding to Ms. Paul, Mr. Lyon stated that the only policy that he is aware of is that minorities, disadvantaged, and women-owned businesses receive a three percent evaluation reduction, similar to the local vendor preference. Mr. Shevock moved to recommend accepting the staff recommendation to award the project to Grassbusters Landscaping in the amount of $874,256.00. The motion was seconded by Dr. Pillsbury and carried with Ms. Arndt abstaining and Mr. Garfinkel voting no. Page 35

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING NOVEMBER 25, 2025 PAGE 11 Item #2. Mr. Garfinkel moved to recommend referring a revaluation to the Utility Committee of the software and the process used. The motion was seconded by Dr. Sudler and unanimously carried. Consideration of the Reclassification and Re-grading of the Senior LAN Analyst Position (David S. Hugg, III, City Manager, and Naomi Poole, Human Resources Director) Mr. David S. Hugg, III, City Manager, reviewed the background and analysis regarding the reclassification and re-grading of the Senior LAN Analyst position. Staff recommended approval of the reclassification and the compensation. Responding to Dr. Sudler, Mr. Hugg stated that the posting was an in-house posting citywide, and any qualified city employee could have applied. Dr. Sudler expressed concerns that the increase could be perceived as biased and questioned if there was anyone in the Information Technology Department who could help fill in until someone could be hired. He noted that there had been increases in things like the electric bills, and what budget would the increases come from. Responding to Dr. Sudler, Mr. Hugg stated that, in his opinion, they should move forward with both increases because the other network administrator should be treated equally. He noted that they may not be given the same amount of money, but the person who currently holds the position should not be disadvantaged or treated unfairly. He explained that there were salary savings in the police department as a result of vacancies, and then their budget would have to supplement the rest of the difference. He stated that they would not be amending the budget to take money from somewhere else, which has implications for next year's budget and has implications for whether the chief can staff some of the physicians that would then otherwise not be funded. Responding to Mr. Boggerty, Mr. Hugg stated that, based on the materials the chief submitted, the two positions on the surface are essentially the same in both Milford and Newark. He explained that there is a federal website that can confirm the salary, and the city's salary is below the average. The federal salary falls in the middle at about eighty thousand. Responding to Mr. Boggerty, Mr. Hugg stated that the Milford and Newark positions are closer to the high nineties and above. The federal positions that he evaluated fall between the mid-seventies to the mid-nineties. He noted that there was no formal market study done at the same level as was done in 2023. Responding to Mr. Boggerty, Chief Johnson stated that his recommendation was based on comparable positions in the immediate proximity to the City of Dover, as well as economic considerations and comparisons with other police departments that used tiered IT systems similar to Dover’s. He noted that the Police Department did not require an IT Director-level position, as those responsibilities were handled by an administrative captain, along with an existing middle- management role and a frontline technical position. Page 36

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING NOVEMBER 25, 2025 PAGE 12 Item #2. He reported that he researched the middle-management role and spoke directly with Chief Ashe in Milford and Chief Farrall in Newark. He stated that Newark served as a Public Employment Relations Board (PERB) recognized comparable jurisdiction for economic and community size factors, making their information particularly relevant to Dover’s labor market. He reviewed job descriptions, pay scales, and related materials as part of his methodology. He further explained that, while he did not consider himself an expert, his experience in labor and contract negotiations had shown that when parties could not reach an agreement and a third-party assessment was required, the State of Delaware historically identified the City of Newark as the appropriate comparable for Dover. He stated that this was based on factors such as population, workforce size, and demographic similarities, which were used to help establish fair market standards in labor-related matters. Responding to Mr. Neil, Chief Johnson stated that it would not have been fair to expect the HR Director to have a candidate “shovel-ready” for advertising or selection, noting that both union and non-bargaining positions required certain procedural steps. He explained that, even under ideal circumstances, filling the position would have taken some time, and emphasized that the City was not operating under ideal conditions, given the technical and supervisory requirements of the role. He further noted that the position was among the most highly vetted within the department due to the sensitive and secure environment in which IT staff operated, and that the current salary structure, unchanged for years, made recruiting qualified candidates difficult. Chief Johnson reported that he had already lost half of his IT staff when the director departed suddenly in July, leaving the department without that resource for nearly six months. The remaining IT staff member was only able to maintain core functions, which reinforced the need for two positions in the department and, ultimately, a third position that he intended to request in the upcoming budget due to increased technological demands. He added that his immediate priority was restoring the department to two positions to preserve institutional knowledge. Having already lost half of that knowledge, he cautioned that losing the remaining half would leave the department significantly challenged and at an exponentially higher risk for operational issues. He estimated that it would likely take more than a year to hire, orient, and train two new employees before the department could regain a stable level of security and functionality. Responding to Mr. Neil, Chief Johnson stated that he has a great working relationship with the city's IT Department and the state-level IT department, and they would figure out how to function moving forward if it came to it. Responding to Dr. Pillsbury, Mr. Joseph Simmons, Information Technology Director, stated that in September, he hired Will Vidal as the network administrator. He noted that Will came from Children’s First as a network administrator, and his experience is comparable. He holds a supervisory role over two LAN Analysts. He explained that the position is comparable to the position at the police department and acknowledged that there are some differences that are unique to law enforcement, but they are very compatible. Page 37

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING NOVEMBER 25, 2025 PAGE 13 Item #2. Responding to Ms. Arndt, Mr. Anderson stated that only civilian positions were covered under the market study done in 2023. He also confirmed that the position was a civilian position. Responding to Ms. Arndt, Ms. Poole confirmed that the position was covered under the market study done three years prior. Ms. Arndt stated that she found it hard to believe the market had changed so significantly in such a short time, noting that comparable jobs and salaries did not reflect increases of that magnitude. She emphasized that while she did not discount anyone’s experience, she did not understand how an employee could work so far above their classification for so long and still be so misaligned with the market analysis. She added that she was uncomfortable with one-off decisions of this nature and believed significant budget changes should be requested during the regular budget review period. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Chief Johnson stated that the position, as it was currently constructed, had not been evaluated in more than a decade. The individual who left the position did so abruptly. He explained that the characterization that the employee is holding the department of the city hostage by threatening to leave is not accurate. He added that there was a discussion about his departure as a LAN Analyst when there appeared to be no foreseeable growth in his role. Unfortunately, the resignation of the director happened on the second day of the budget year, which left no opportunity to properly bring it before the council. As soon as there became a middle manager vacancy, he began updating the job description because the position could not be advertised without an accurate reflection of what the job would entail. He added duties that were now being done and removed those that no longer needed to be covered. He explained that he began researching when the employee came to him with what his peers in Delaware were making, and proposed what he would like to be making now that he had won the job through the competition that was done in-house to keep the institutional knowledge. Had there been another person with institutional knowledge, he may have considered a broader call for candidates to fill the secondary role, but the employee was the only institutional knowledge left. He further noted that after completing the in-house advertisement, Human Resources offered the candidate the salary figure that they had to because the city has a policy that governs what the Human Resources Director is allowed to offer. When it was pointed out to him that the market reflected different numbers for almost identical positions in comparable agencies, he started making calls to verify the numbers. He attributed the issues to the prior employee being complacent and not being interested in drawing attention to themselves to discuss the issue. Now that they are in transition, that individual now has the opportunity for himself after going through the process. He acknowledged that it would have to go before the council because the market had clearly shifted, and the position needed a new title. He explained that the individual was not using a strong-arm tactic; rather, at his request, the employee had remained with the department, maintained its operations, and delayed seeking other employment. He stated that the current discussion was focused on whether the employee could continue his career with appropriate market equity, and once he learned of the comparable position within the City’s IT Department, he also considered position equity. He emphasized that the Page 38

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING NOVEMBER 25, 2025 PAGE 14 Item #2. employee possessed the training, credentials, and background for a managerial-level IT role, not at the director level, but also not an entry-level position, and that this justified the salary level he was proposing. He further noted that the two comparable positions with eight years of experience were still earning significantly more than the Dover position. When the employee countered with a higher salary request, he declined, citing the City’s budgetary constraints, but stated he would advocate to bring the employee into a reasonable range without making him the highest-paid public safety IT manager in Delaware. He stated that the proposal he brought forward placed the salary in the “ballpark” and would help retain valuable institutional knowledge. He added that both he and Mr. Simmons agreed that institutional knowledge was difficult to replace, and losing both the supervisor and frontline IT positions simultaneously would require starting from scratch. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Mr. Simmons stated that the person in his department covers the whole city except for the police department and certain sections of the library. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Mr. Simmons stated that the police department is a part of the city, but law enforcement has certain parameters that do not allow the city to take over all aspects, such as the data controlled by the State of Delaware and body-worn cameras. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Mr. Simmons stated that his employees could get training so that they could fill in on an emergency basis. He noted that both LAN Analysts are Delaware Criminal Justice Information System (DELJIS) certified so that they may support the Fire Marshal and Code Enforcement office. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Ms. Poole stated that the financial impact is a little more than $60,000 and includes the ancillary costs like benefits and insurance for two positions. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Ms. Poole stated that the position could have been posted publicly, but the chief chose to post it internally, and only one person was interested in the role. She noted that an applicant would still need to meet the credentials to apply. There was the option of it being posted externally as well, which may have garnered some competition and a pool of candidates for him to choose from in case things do not work out. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Ms. Poole stated that when they posted for Mr. Simmons' network administrator position in May, there were eleven applicants. The interviews began in June, and an offer was extended in July, which they considered a relatively quick turnaround. She noted that the applicants met the necessary credentials for the role. The LAN analyst position was also posted in May, with twenty-nine applicants interviewed in August, leading to hires in September. She emphasized that the idea of it possibly being a hard-to-fill position is just a theory, and she provided facts to show it is not a hard-to-fill role. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Ms. Poole confirmed that there was a number of applicants, which gave Mr. Simmons a variety of people to review and interview. She noted that people will apply for the positions, especially considering the pay rate. The current pay rate is not low, and when she Page 39

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING NOVEMBER 25, 2025 PAGE 15 Item #2. researched, the median was around $80,000. She emphasized that with the new non-bargaining scale, the rates will increase, and that should be taken into account for the position presented. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Ms. Poole confirmed that giving one person a $30,000 increase would create morale issues. She noted that it is unfair, it sets a precedent of preferential treatment, and picking out employees because you are concerned that they will leave is not a good reason to provide an increase, and there should be more in retention and retaining employees. She emphasized that cross-training is extremely important in the current situation because not one person should hold the key to everything, and that is a failure in management. Management should ensure that all employees are able to pick up and do pieces of work. She stated that the non- bargaining scale was implemented for equity. She said that she has been speaking about equity since she started with the city over three years ago. Equity is important for all, not just two employees. Responding to Mr. Boggerty, Ms. Poole said that when comparing the job descriptions, they are quite similar. Some tasks will be handled by the City of Dover IT Department that the Police Department IT will not do, and vice versa, so it balances out. Responding to Dr. Sudler, Ms. Poole stated that the city completed a market study in 2023, which she believed had been beneficial for both the city and its employees. She explained that the non- bargaining pay scale should have been implemented in 2024, as doing so would have allowed for timely increases that maintained comparable rates with surrounding municipalities and helped address compression issues. Because the implementation occurred only recently, the city was now trying to catch up, with union employees receiving increases of more than seven percent while some non-bargaining employees were earning less than their subordinates. She stated that this created concerns regarding fairness and market equity. In discussing comparable municipalities, she noted that Newark was used as a comparison specifically for police positions and not for all positions, and that the city generally sought municipalities similar to Dover to make appropriate comparisons. Responding to Dr. Sudler, Ms. Poole emphasized that the initiative would significantly impact the city’s fair and competitive pay structures and policies. She stated that the current policy provides that any employee receiving a promotion is granted either a five-percent increase or the starting salary of the next grade, whichever is higher. She noted that implementing a $30,000 increase would bypass these internal policies and questioned how such an action could be considered fair. Ms. Poole further stressed that deviating from established policy creates liability and is not sustainable. She explained that Human Resources is responsible for compliance and adherence to policy and procedure, and stated that she could not support actions that deviate from those requirements. Responding to Dr. Sudler, Ms. Marney stated that the proposal would impact the budget. She explained that after reviewing both the Police and IT salary budgets, the Police Department’s salary line for FY25, while still in the audit process, had been over budget by nearly five percent, and as of the current year, they had already expended approximately forty percent of their salary allocation. She noted that, although the Police Chief had not filled the director’s position, any Page 40

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING NOVEMBER 25, 2025 PAGE 16 Item #2. salary savings from that vacancy could potentially help offset the proposed increase, depending on the selected individual’s benefit elections. She cautioned that the budget impact would extend beyond the current year. Regarding the IT Department, Ms. Marney stated that their FY25 salary line had been over budget by about one percent, based on unaudited figures. She added that they had used approximately thirty-three percent of their salary budget thus far this year and would realize some savings from unfilled positions, though not in an amount sufficient to fully cover the increase. Responding to Mr. Rocha, Chief Johnson explained that when the position became vacant, the Police Department reviewed the job description and determined that it no longer reflected the current duties and responsibilities. He stated that the department worked with Human Resources to update the description so it accurately represented the position to be filled. He noted that once the significant salary differences came to his attention, he reviewed comparable positions in nearby municipalities. He emphasized that not all municipalities had IT structures that allowed for direct comparisons, as some had only one or two staff, some assigned IT work as a collateral duty, and others used contracted services. Chief Johnson stated that Milford and Newark were ultimately identified as having the most comparable job descriptions, and those were submitted to the City Administration in his September 30 memo. He added that, although none of the positions were identical, they were similar enough in responsibilities to be considered comparable. He further explained that Dover’s IT staff also supported 9-1-1 operations and the citywide camera system, which were functions not fully mirrored in the other municipalities. However, he believed that when unique duties were weighed against one another, the positions remained balanced overall. He concluded that, based on his research, the proposed classification and salary aligned with market conditions and ensured an equitable comparison. Responding to Mr. Rocha, Chief Johnson stated that he currently has two employees pitching in. He has an AFSCME LAN Analyst that has been acting as a Senior LAN Analyst in a non- bargaining role with a five percent temporary adjustment to his pay to keep them in good working order. He stated that the last time he checked, the employee was receiving anywhere from fifteen to eighteen hours of overtime each pay period to make sure they do not suffer a setback in a critical function or a critical piece of equipment. Chief Johnson stated that he had not brought the issue forward lightly and explained that, over the past four years, he had consistently addressed matters related to position equity and value. He noted that each situation followed a different path depending on its timing and circumstances, but he had successfully advocated for adjustments for several employees, including the 911 Center Director, his Executive Assistant, the Social Services Clinician, and the Resource Manager, when evaluations showed such actions were warranted. He added that he had also declined numerous requests that did not meet the necessary criteria, emphasizing that equity required valid comparators and appropriate justification. Chief Johnson explained that, in the current case, he had conducted his own independent research and determined that the employee had a valid point. While he did not support the full request made Page 41

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING NOVEMBER 25, 2025 PAGE 17 Item #2. by the employee, he supported the salary figure he identified as aligning with comparable positions within Delaware. He stated that he consistently advocated for equitable treatment within his department to maintain morale and that he had exercised due diligence, including saying no when appropriate. He further noted that moving the employee into the management position would create temporary salary savings because the position had not drawn any pay during the current budget year, and that filling the vacancy would require a lengthy background process unique to police operations. Chief Johnson acknowledged that the issue was challenging for council because the position had not been reviewed in many years, making the salary change appear more dramatic. He expressed concern for the employee affected and recognized that similar parity concerns raised by another department might also be justified, though details could not be discussed in open session. He emphasized that he did not take the matter lightly, had no intention of disrespecting council or the community, and believed the issue arose simply because an unplanned vacancy prompted a review that had not been conducted proactively in the past. Dr. Sudler expressed appreciation for the accountability demonstrated and suggested that the position be coordinated with the Human Resources director and reposted externally to evaluate the applicant pool. He noted that this approach would balance fairness to candidates with budgetary considerations and operational efficiency. Dr. Sudler moved to recommend having the Police Chief work with Human Resources to externally post the job, gather a candidate pool for thirty to sixty days, and then bring it back to the committee for further discussion and consideration. The motion was seconded by Mr. Lewis. Responding to Mayor Christiansen, Chief Johnson stated that it was difficult to predict the outcome of the current personnel matter. He emphasized that he does not want to overstate potential consequences or speculate on how the employee might react. He noted that the employee, an eight- year tenured member of the department, had initially planned to leave but stayed at Chief Johnson’s request to support departmental continuity and mentor future staff. Chief Johnson acknowledged that, despite a recent promotion, the employee might still consider other opportunities, including in the private sector, and he could not predict the employee’s response to council’s actions. Responding to Mr. Boggerty, Chief Johnson stated that the job was offered and the employee countered at a range that was beyond what anyone could provide without councils approval. He noted that they have been waiting to get the item on an agenda to provide a response to the employees' counteroffer. Ms. Poole recommended that the employee be placed at the current grade for the Network Administrator position (Grade 129). She noted that, under the newly implemented pay scale, the employee is set to receive approximately $9,500 in January and July 2026, and her recommendation aligns with the following established policy. Ms. Marney stated that some employee-specific nuances could not be discussed, but Grade 129, Step 1 would receive $32.65 an hour or $67,912 annually. She noted that it was the maximum range, and the mid-range was $40.16 an hour and $83,532 annually. Page 42

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING NOVEMBER 25, 2025 PAGE 18 Item #2. Responding to Mr. Anderson, Ms. Marney stated that Step 16 would be $50.87 an hour or $105,810 annually. Responding to Dr. Sudler, Mr. Anderson confirmed that it would be two employees at the proposed rate. He also confirmed that it would be around $200,000. Dr. Sudler emphasized the need for quarterly budget reviews. Mr. Anderson noted that Ms. Marney was previously sick, but they would be scheduled for December. Ms. Marney acknowledged the complexity of the issue and noted that while Finance typically does not intervene in such matters, she has observed the broader impact across the city. She recommended updating the longstanding policy to provide city management greater flexibility, allowing for potential increases of up to fifteen percent instead of the current five percent, while remaining within budget. She noted that implementing such changes would require further review of nuances, including impacts on internal candidates and transitions between bargaining units, and suggested this be considered for future evaluation to address citywide concerns rather than individual positions. Responding to Dr. Sudler, Ms. Marney stated that they would have to be evaluated on application so that the constituents would not have to consume the implementation. She noted that it would have to work within the approved budget. Dr. Sudler emphasized the need to address the current staffing issue in a measured and equitable way. He highlighted the importance of balancing employee well-being with fiduciary responsibility to constituents, noting that timing and fairness are critical when determining compensation. Dr. Sudler stressed that solutions should serve both current and future employees while ensuring the municipality remains competitive and avoids favoritism. He recommended focusing on Human Resources’ guidance to address the immediate need while considering long- term organizational and constituent impacts. Mr. Anderson expressed concerns with the motion, stating that it may need a legal review because it could interfere with the charter, as the position is not technically open. He noted that an offer has been made, the position is not council-appointed, and they could be interfering with the hiring process, as the charter gives to the city manager. Ms. Poole stated that a decision needs to be made, but the decision needs to follow city policy. Mr. Lewis questioned whether they would be following the current policy by bringing the position to Grade 129 and whether they were following the guidelines of the 2023 wage study that was mentioned. Page 43

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING NOVEMBER 25, 2025 PAGE 19 Item #2. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Ms. Poole noted that they would not. They would be following the handbook policy, which states that if a promotion happens, the recipient will receive a five percent increase or the start of the next pay grade, whichever one is highest. Dr. Sudler clarified that his motion was to have the Chief collaborate with Human Resources to repost the position and attract additional candidates. He emphasized that the motion was not intended to override any charter rights or departmental jurisdiction, but rather to provide guidance and support in the hiring process. Dr. Sudler noted that, as the city’s Human Resources Department serves as the central expert on workplace matters, it is appropriate for Human Resources to be the focal point in recruitment and employment decisions, particularly in departments, such as the Police Department, that do not have their own Human Resources personnel. He underscored the importance of a coordinated, “Team Dover” approach, ensuring compliance with workplace standards while leveraging Human Resources expertise. Ms. Paul expressed concern regarding adherence to the city’s policy limiting salary increases to five percent. She questioned why a proposed increase for a recently vacated position exceeded this limit, suggesting that doing so could constitute poor stewardship of taxpayer funds and potentially expose the city to legal risk. She emphasized that the chief does not have unilateral authority to set salaries above policy limits and urged that the position be filled through standard recruitment processes rather than offering an excessive increase. She stated that the situation did not constitute an urgent need and stressed fiscal responsibility in managing public resources. Belinda Main, City of Dover, expressed concern over the proposed $30,000 raise for a single position, noting that city employees typically receive only a two percent annual increase. She emphasized that such a large increase would place an unfair burden on taxpayers and on other employees who perform multiple roles and work overtime to cover responsibilities. She urged the council to consider fairness and fiscal responsibility, highlighting the contributions of staff who perform multiple duties without similar compensation. Jesse Riggin, 40 Maple Lane, Dover, clarified that the position under discussion was being reviewed based on the job description. He noted that Human Resources had provided a recommendation to adjust the position to Grade 129 and stated that it seemed appropriate to act on their feedback. Ms. Arndt asked for the motion to be restated and expressed concerns with reposting the position if someone had already been interviewed and the job had been provided to the applicant. Ms. Arielle Rivera, Assistant City Clerk, stated that the motion was to recommend having the Police Chief work with Human Resources to externally post the job, gather a candidate pool for thirty to sixty days, and then bring it back to the committee for further discussion and consideration. Ms. Arndt noted that she did not believe that council could make that decision. Dr. Sudler questioned if they could obtain a legal review after the motion has passed. Page 44

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING NOVEMBER 25, 2025 PAGE 20 Item #2. Mr. Lewis questioned whether they would be voting on the original proposal. Mr. Anderson stated that if the current motion passed, they would not be voting on the original proposal nor the recommendation of Ms. Poole. Responding to Ms. Arndt, Ms. Poole stated that in order to post the position, the applicant would have to decline the role because there is an outstanding offer on the table, and they do have to honor that. Dr. Sudler withdrew the original motion, as did Mr. Lewis as the seconder. Dr. Sudler moved to recommend deferring the item back to the committee in thirty to sixty days to see if the applicant has accepted the position and revisit it at a later date. The motion was seconded by Ms. Hall. Mr. Lewis recommended having the Human Resources Director keep council abreast of what was transpiring. Dr. Sudler and Ms. Hall were amenable to the amendment. Mr. Neil questioned whether, if the applicant accepts the position, that means it will automatically be regraded and reclassified based on what was negotiated. Responding to Mr. Neil, Mr. Anderson stated that it would be based upon the counteroffer made, not the one that has not been approved. Ms. Poole stated that they would follow the policy; the network administrative position at Grade 129 is what the offer would be. It would be at five percent or the start of Grade 129, whichever one is the highest, that is what the rate would be. She noted that there would be no regrading and the retitling already happened. It was moved from a Senior LAN Analyst position to a Network Administrator. She emphasized that there would be no regrading. Dr. Sudler moved to recommend deferring the item back to the committee in thirty to sixty days to see if the applicant has accepted the position, and revisit it at a later date, and have the Human Resources Director keep council abreast of what was transpiring. The motion was seconded by Ms. Hall and unanimously carried. Proposed Ordinance #2025-17 – Proposed Changes and Additions to Strengthen the Current Stormwater Ordinance by Amending Chapter 98 – Streets, Sidewalks, Storm sewers, and other public places, Article I – In General, and Appendix F (Mark Nowak, Public Works Director) Mr. Mark Nowak, Public Works Director, Ms. Bryn Wambaugh, Stormwater Coordinator, and Mr. Eddie Kopp, Chief Code Enforcement Officer, reviewed the background and analysis of Proposed Ordinance #2025-17. Staff recommended forwarding Proposed Ordinance #2025-17 to City Council for approval. Page 45

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING NOVEMBER 25, 2025 PAGE 21 Item #2. Responding to Mr. Anderson, Mr. Nowak stated that those with a sump pump that directly discharges into the stormwater system have to be able to prove that the water is not contaminated. He noted that sump pumps can be discharged into the grass or into an area of nature, and then it naturally filters through the grass and goes into the road and catch basin. He explained that previously, there was nothing in the ordinance that addressed sump pumps, and it is an issue that Code Enforcement has to address often. Responding to Mr. Rocha, Mr. Kopp stated that in his experience, he has found that it is not always sump pumps that go into the stormwater structure. He noted seeing washing machines, dishwashers, recreational vehicles, and several other items that should not be discharged directly into the stormwater. If they suspect that anything other than stormwater is being discharged, they will require the testing of the water to make sure it complies with the MS4 permit. Mr. Neil moved to recommend accepting the staff recommendation to forward Proposed Ordinance #2025-17 to council for approval. The motion was seconded by Ms. Arndt and unanimously carried. Staff Substitute – Proposed Ordinance #2025-21 – Amending Chapter 106 – Traffic and Vehicles, Article III – Stopping, Standing, and Parking by adding Sec. 106-139 – Pedestrian Safety (Councilman Anderson, David S. Hugg, III, City Manager, and Chief Johnson) Mr. David S. Hugg, III, City Manager, reviewed the background and analysis of the staff substitute of Proposed Ordinance #2025-21. Staff recommended forwarding staff substitute #1 of Proposed Ordinance #2025-21 to council for approval. Chief Johnson stated that the Police Department’s primary concern is traffic safety. He indicated support for issuing warnings rather than citations and emphasized the need for a mechanism to remove individuals from hazardous situations. He noted that repeated enforcement is unlikely to occur frequently, as officers generally encounter individuals for the first time, and stressed that the key tool for officers is the ability to direct people out of harm’s way. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Chief Johnson stated that a no panhandling sign to his knowledge, with the understanding that panhandling is a protected right, would result in a First Amendment challenge. Mr. Lewis corrected his statement and withdrew the word panhandling but asked about a no- standing sign in the median. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Chief Johnson stated that if they were to place a no stopping or standing sign, which is not unusual to see in traffic safety, as long as there was an ordinance to back it up, they would be able to enforce that. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Chief Johnson explained that for signs to be effective in enforcing local rules or state laws, there must be a mechanism to gain compliance. He noted that if only warnings could be issued, officers would be limited in their ability to enforce the ordinance and would need Page 46

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING NOVEMBER 25, 2025 PAGE 22 Item #2. further direction from council on how to proceed when individuals refuse to comply. He emphasized that without the ability to cite or take enforcement action, signs alone may not achieve the intended compliance. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Chief Johnson explained that enforcement of ordinance violations requires both initiating enforcement and abating the condition. He noted that officers are authorized to take necessary actions, including arrest if required, to gain compliance, though such confrontations are rare. He emphasized that this approach is consistent with the enforcement of other low-level offenses under the city code and that in most cases, individuals comply voluntarily, reserving disputes for the courts. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Chief Johnson noted that under Title 21, enforcement authority depends on the specific activity. While the law technically regulates median strip use, it does not address activities such as setting up tents, using wheelchairs, or soliciting money, which are protected under the First Amendment. He explained that although the statute exists, enforcement is limited because it is generally not supported by the Attorney General or courts. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Chief Johnson stated that under Title 21, if it were being prosecuted and if the judge allowed it, then yes, they have the authority. However, right now, politically, that is not the reality. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Chief Johnson stated that council, as the local authority, is giving the department the authority to enforce the ordinance. The ordinance will be local law, not state law, so he will be empowered to follow through with a local-level ordinance rather than using a state citation or citing the state code. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Chief Johnson explained that while fines and collections for repeat offenders are rarely fully recovered, the enforcement mechanism provides officers the authority to address situations immediately, particularly for public safety hazards or chronic issues such as public intoxication. He emphasized that the primary purpose is to manage the situation in the moment, even if long-term compliance or payment is unlikely. Responding to Mr. Neil, Chief Johnson stated that there is a Supreme Court of the United States decision that panhandling, as long as it is not intimidating, harassing, or does not address another area of criminality, but simply asking someone for money, is a First Amendment-protected activity. Responding to Mr. Neil, Chief Johnson stated that they hardly ever arrest someone for panhandling unless they are aggressive. Typically, there would have to be a cooperating complainant who would provide a statement as to what the conduct was, but it is a rare occurrence. Responding to Mr. Neil, Chief Johnson clarified that the Police Department cannot arrest anyone for panhandling. Enforcement under the ordinance is limited to removing individuals from medians or high-risk traffic intersections due to inherent safety hazards. He emphasized that the department’s focus is solely on public safety in these areas, not on the act of soliciting money elsewhere. Page 47

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING NOVEMBER 25, 2025 PAGE 23 Item #2. Responding to Mr. Neil, Chief Johnson confirmed that the first penalty would be a warning. Responding to Mr. Rocha, Chief Johnson stated that the adjacent roadway would be the connecting street to the intersection. For example, MLK would be the connecting street to Dupont Highway or any other street that intersects with the main roadway. Responding to Mr. Rocha, Chief Johnson stated that the sidewalk is a pedestrian traffic way that is free to everyone to transverse. Responding to Mr. Rocha, Chief Johnson noted that the ordinance’s limitation on occupancy applies to medians and the adjacent roadway. He explained that the area next to the median, typically marked by painted lines, may include a narrow strip of roadway that is not necessarily part of the traffic lane, and he will verify the specifics. Responding to Mr. Rocha, Chief Johnson explained that Section D prohibits operators from stopping, parking, or leaving a vehicle standing on city streets, or deviating from traffic lanes, to respond to persons violating the ordinance. This provision, modeled after a similar ordinance in another Delaware community, aims to prevent traffic hazards caused by motorists spontaneously stopping for individuals in medians. He noted that the proper approach is to park safely before interacting and that the ordinance provides for a warning initially, with fines as applicable. Ms. Arndt stated that she has spoken to folks in her district and in her neighborhood. She read the following statement: “While I share the very real safety concern about pedestrians standing in the narrow medians and heavy traffic areas, this ordinance has the potential to create more problems than it solves. I am uncomfortable moving it forward. I understand the intent is safety, not punishment. Unfortunately, in practice, issuing fines to individuals who have no means to pay is neither effective nor does it affect change. It also exposes the city to potential litigation without delivering meaningful improvements to public safety. This was a huge concern of mine, of putting the city at risk. I appreciate and value the Chief’s insights and operational challenges. I want to acknowledge my colleagues' sincere effort in bringing this issue forward and his grace and professionalism through public criticism. The safety risks he identified are real. Thank you, Councilman Anderson. At the same time, I call on those who oppose this ordinance on moral grounds to stay engaged in ways that generally help by regularly visiting the areas where people are standing in medians and entice them to safer locations, offer resources or services to address root causes. We all share the same goal: a safer community. I believe we can pursue the goal more effectively through collaboration and compassion than through this ordinance”. Mr. Boggerty stated that while he supports the safety intent of the ordinance, he cannot support issuing fines to individuals who are panhandling, emphasizing that moral judgment over need is not their role. He noted concerns about the practical enforcement challenges for the Police Department and stressed the importance of community vigilance to ensure safety. He expressed hope for alternative solutions that address public safety without penalizing those in vulnerable situations and acknowledged Councilman Anderson’s good intentions, but indicated this ordinance is not the path he would support. Page 48

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING NOVEMBER 25, 2025 PAGE 24 Item #2. Mr. Shevock expressed concern for individuals panhandling in medians, noting observed instances where they collected money from vehicles, creating a significant safety hazard. He stated full support for removing people from the roadway or median, emphasizing that while panhandling on sidewalks or curbs is acceptable, individuals should not be in the center of traffic where both they and motorists are at risk. Mr. Rocha stated that while he has no objection to panhandling generally, he is concerned about safety when individuals are in medians, particularly those in wheelchairs, citing a recent near- incident near Walgreens and CVS. He emphasized the need to proactively protect individuals by ensuring they choose safer locations, prioritizing safety over procedural or statistical considerations. Ms. Hall stated that she is not confident that the proposed ordinance or strictly enforced fines will achieve the intended safety outcomes. She suggested alternative solutions, including posting signs indicating safe areas for individuals to stand, and emphasized a compassionate, supportive approach when officers respond to people in vulnerable or mentally ill states. She highlighted the potential for community engagement and acts of kindness to improve safety while respecting individuals, rather than relying solely on enforcement. Mr. Garfinkel commended Mr. Anderson for bringing forward the ordinance, emphasizing that it addresses a critical public safety issue. He noted that individuals in medians are at risk of falling and being struck by vehicles and stated that while the ordinance could be stronger, it represents a positive first step in protecting people. Dr. Sudler stated that the primary focus of the ordinance should be public safety, emphasizing the dangers posed by pedestrians in medians to both them and drivers. While acknowledging the need for enforcement, he suggested starting with signage and community outreach to guide individuals to safer locations and provide resources, such as mental health or food assistance. He emphasized that the intent is safety first, not punishment, and noted that although he initially offered an amendment, he cannot support the ordinance in its current form due to vagueness. Dr. Sudler moved to start a pilot program to provide No Stopping, No Standing signs on the median with no penalty. The motion was seconded by Ms. Hall. Dr. Pillsbury recommended adding strictly enforced so that the police can remind them of the signs. Dr. Sudler and Ms. Hall were amenable to the amendment. Ms. Arndt questioned the motion, stating that they should take a look at what signs are permissible. There are sign standards and whether or not they can put no-stopping, standing signs in a median when the median is designed to be a refuge for someone who is crossing the street. It may or may not be appropriate to put a sign there saying that someone cannot stand there when the median was designed for someone to stand there until the light changes. Page 49

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING NOVEMBER 25, 2025 PAGE 25 Item #2. Ms. Smack emphasized that not all individuals in medians are impaired and expressed concern about potential signage and fines impacting elderly pedestrians, such as those at Luther Towers, who may need multiple light cycles to cross streets safely. She noted her own efforts to advocate for people on medians and commended Dover Police officers for proactively addressing safety without the ordinance. She questioned the necessity of the ordinance, suggesting that existing efforts adequately address the safety concerns. Ms. Paul stated that existing state laws under Title 21 already address public intoxication, obstruction of view, and disorderly conduct, providing multiple enforcement options for officers. She emphasized that Dover Police are already actively managing safety in medians and redirecting individuals as needed. She noted that creating a new ordinance would be redundant, potentially reduce penalties compared to state law, and would not allow officers to compel individuals into treatment, reinforcing that current laws are sufficient for public safety enforcement. Adam Windett, 218 N. State Street, Dover, urged the council to vote against the ordinance, stating that the city has not demonstrated a public safety need, shown that the ordinance would be effective, or proven that it could not achieve its objective through less restrictive means. He suggested alternative measures, such as signage, to alert drivers to pedestrians in medians. He also expressed concern about the timing of controversial items on the agenda, noting that placing them late in meetings may discourage public participation. Belinda Main, Dover, expressed strong opposition to the ordinance, emphasizing that penalizing individuals who panhandle, as well as those who assist them, undermines charitable efforts and community support. She stressed the importance of helping vulnerable people and criticized the ordinance for discouraging acts of kindness, arguing that the community should focus on providing assistance rather than imposing fines. Shan Myles, Dover, stated that compassion is not a crime, survival isn’t a crime. Compassionate people are not criminals, and people facing poverty are not criminals. She emphasized that the community needs support, not fines. David Green, Dover, opposed the ordinance, emphasizing that not all individuals panhandling are impaired and highlighting the challenges faced by those trying to secure housing, shelter, or employment. He stressed that penalizing people who are working to support themselves or their families is unjust and called for increased outreach programs to assist individuals seeking to improve their circumstances. Eve Durman, Dover, shared personal challenges, including difficulty obtaining identification and securing housing while fifteen weeks pregnant, and requested community and governmental assistance to help her and her fiancé find safe housing in preparation for their baby. She emphasized the urgency of support for families in vulnerable situations. Ronald Eads, Dover, described his personal circumstances, including living on the streets with his fiancé, relying on panhandling for survival, and facing significant medical challenges and financial hardships due to disability payment delays. He emphasized that helping those who are panhandling Page 50

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING NOVEMBER 25, 2025 PAGE 26 Item #2. should not be treated as a crime and highlighted the physical and financial struggles he endures to survive. Shyanne Miller, Wilmington, Delaware, stated she was a co-coordinantor with the Holmes campaign and expressed opposition to the ordinance. She noted that Section D could penalize drivers who stop to respond to individuals and expressed concern about tracking written warnings for repeat offenders. She criticized the suggestion that residents should enforce safety, emphasizing that it is the government’s role to create conditions for economic stability and support. She encouraged the council to consider alternative solutions, including using city-owned properties for transitional housing, establishing a city-run homeless services office, prioritizing vouchers for those experiencing homelessness, and providing public restrooms, showers, and daily maintenance to improve safety and support for individuals on medians. Branden Fletcher, Wilmington, Delaware, stated he was from the Holmes campaign and expressed opposition to the ordinance. He stated that penalizing unhoused individuals and those who assist them is ineffective and places additional burdens on the city, taxpayers, and police. He emphasized that the ordinance does not address housing, shelter, or safety needs and highlighted the First Amendment protections for peaceful solicitation. He urged the council to table the ordinance and pursue solutions rooted in fact, such as expanding shelters and services, rather than enacting measures that are unconstitutional, costly, and ineffective. Stephan Pierce, 437 Barrister Place, Dover, stated that while he initially thought the ordinance was a good idea, he now recognizes the negative impact it would have on individuals relying on panhandling to support themselves and their families. Drawing from his own experience with homelessness, he emphasized the importance of self-sufficiency and urged the council to vote against the ordinance, noting that better solutions could be developed in the future. Tyler Mock, Dover, emphasized the importance of treating individuals with respect and avoiding judgment based on appearances or assumptions about health conditions. He noted the impact of conditions such as diabetes and urged putting people first in interactions. Eric Czerwinski, 34 Maple Lane, Dover, emphasized that the issue under discussion is strictly a matter of public safety, particularly regarding pedestrians on narrow, beveled medians where vehicles travel at high speeds. He argued that enforcing ordinances is necessary to protect both pedestrians and drivers, noting that past attempts to place signs on medians were ineffective. He urged the council to depoliticize the matter, prioritize safety over fines, and support measures that allow law enforcement to remove individuals from hazardous medians. Jeannie Anderson, Dover, shared a personal safety concern, describing an incident at a traffic light where an individual approached and banged on her vehicle while she was alone at night and unable to move her car. She noted that many women have similar experiences but were not present to speak, and emphasized that those affected by such incidents also deserve to have their concerns considered. Mr. Anderson thanked the Legislative Finance Administration Committee and emphasized that the issue at hand is public safety, particularly regarding pedestrians in medians and their potential to Page 51

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING NOVEMBER 25, 2025 PAGE 27 Item #2. distract drivers. He noted the need for enforceable laws to ensure accountability and protect both pedestrians and motorists, citing prior incidents where individuals were put at risk. Dr. Sudler moved to recommend starting a pilot program to provide No Stopping, No Standing signs on the median with no penalty, along with Strictly Enforced signs. The motion was seconded by Dr. Pillsbury and failed by a roll call vote of two yes (Hall and Sudler), seven no (Boggerty, Arndt, Rocha, Lewis, Neil, Shevock, Garfinkel), and two abstentions (Anderson, Pillsbury). Mr. Garfinkel moved to recommend the passage of Proposed Ordinance #2025-21. The motion was seconded by Mr. Shevock and carried by a roll call vote of six yes (Anderson, Pillsbury, Rocha, Neil, Shevock, Garfinkel), and five no (Hall, Boggerty, Arndt, Sudler, Lewis). Mr. Anderson moved for adjournment of the Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee meeting, hearing no objection the meeting adjourned at 11:43 p.m. Mr. Neil moved for adjournment of the Council Committee of the Whole meeting, hearing no objection the meeting adjourned at 11:43 p.m. Fred A. Neil Council President Page 52

CITY COUNJC!L Item #17. COM�UNJITY ENJHANJCEMENJT FUNJD REPORT OCTOBER 2025 Page 53

Item #17. CITY COUNCIL COMMUNITY ENHANCEMENT FUND JULY 1, 2025 - JUNE 30, 2026 100-10-12-99-000-53037 Current Balance - $ 16,250.00 BUDGETED AMOUNT $ 25,000.00 COMMUNITY ENHANCEMENT FUND - $2, 500 FOR EACH COUNCIL MEMBER PER DISTRICT AND $5, 500 FOR THE AT-LARGE COUNCIL MEMBER. THE PURPOSE OF THE FUND IS TO ALLOW MEMBERS TO CONTRIBUTE FUNDS TO A SMALL PROJECT OR COMMUNITY NEEDS IN EACH DISTRICT. Total $ 25,000.00 Date COUNCIL SPONSOR Vendor Description P.O. #/INVOICE # BATCH# TOTAL CHARGES YEAR TO DATE BALANCE Councilman Anderson authorized the designation of $500 Email from David Anderson dated 06/02/2025 and of his community enhancement funds to the Hispanic an email from Anthony (Tony) Velazquez Hispanic Organization of Latin Organization of Latin Americans (HOLA) for their Baila Con Founder/CEO dated 06/02/2025 7/1/2025 Anderson Americans (HOLA) Dover Festival. 6577 $ 500.00 $ 500.00 $ 24,500.00 Councilman Sudler authorized the designation of $1,000 Email from Roy Sudler, Jr dated 07/03/2025 and a of his community enhancement funds to Holy Trinity letter from Pastor Sheila Lomax dated 06/20/2025 7/3/2025 Sudler Holy Trinity UAME Church UAME Church for their Youth Empowerment event. 6577 $ 1,000.00 $ 1,500.00 $ 23,500.00 Councilman Rocha authorized the designation of $200 of Email from Gerald Rocha, Sr. dated 07/05/2025 and his community enhancement funds to Holy Trinity UAME an email from Pastor Sheila Lomax dated 7/5/2025 Rocha Holy Trinity UAME Church Church for their Youth Empowerment event. 07/04/2025 6577 $ 200.00 $ 1,700.00 $ 23,300.00 Councilman Anderson authorized the designation of $200 Email from David Anderson dated 07/07/2054 and a of his community enhancement funds to Holy Trinity letter from Pastor Sheila Lomax dated 06/20/2025 7/7/2025 Anderson Holy Trinity UAME Church UAME Church for their Youth Empowerment event. 6577 $ 200.00 $ 1,900.00 $ 23,100.00 ` Councilman Lewis authorized the designation of $400 of Email from Brian Lewis dated 07/07/2054 and a his community enhancement funds to Holy Trinity UAME letter from Pastor Sheila Lomax dated 06/20/2025 7/7/2025 Lewis Holy Trinity UAME Church Church for their Youth Empowerment event. 6577 $ 400.00 $ 2,300.00 $ 22,700.00 Councilman Boggerty authorized the designation of $150 Email from Andre Boggerty dated 07/09/2025 and a of his community enhancement funds to Holy Trinity letter from Pastor Sheila Lomax dated 06/20/2025 7/9/2025 Boggerty Holy Trinity UAME Church UAME Church for their Youth Empowerment event. 6656 $ 150.00 $ 2,450.00 $ 22,550.00 Councilwoman Pillsbury authorized the designation of Email from Julia Pillsbury dated 07/11/2025 andan $200 of her community enhancement funds to Holy Trinity email from Pastor Sheila Lomax dated 07/04/2025 7/14/2025 Pillsbury Holy Trinity UAME Church UAME Church for their Youth Empowerment event. 6656 $ 200.00 $ 2,650.00 $ 22,350.00 Councilwoman Pillsbury authorized the designation of Email from Julia Pillsbury dated 07/11/2025 and an $200 of her community enhancement funds to the email from Anthony (Tony) Velazquez Founder/CEO Hispanic Organization of Latin Hispanic Organization of Latin Americans (HOLA) for their dated 07/11/2025 7/14/2025 Pillsbury Americans (HOLA) Baila Con Dover Festival. 6656 $ 200.00 $ 2,850.00 $ 22,150.00 Councilman Boggerty authorized the designation of $200 Email from Andree Boggerty dated 07/14/2025 and of his community enhancement funds to the Hispanic an email from Anthony (Tony) Velazquez Hispanic Organization of Latin Organization of Latin Americans (HOLA) for their Baila Con Founder/CEO dated 07/11/2025 7/14/2025 Boggerty Americans (HOLA) Dover Festival. 6656 $ 200.00 $ 3,050.00 $ 21,950.00 Councilwoman Hall authorized the designation of $200 of Email from Donyale Hall dated 07/11/2025 andan her community enhancement funds to Holy Trinity UAME email from Pastor Sheila Lomax dated 06/20/25 7/17/2025 Hall Holy Trinity UAME Church Church for their Youth Empowerment event. 6764 $ 200.00 $ 3,250.00 $ 21,750.00 Councilman Rocha authorized the designation of $250 of his community enhancement funds to the Hispanic Email from Gerald Rocha dated 07/28/2025 and an Hispanic Organization of Latin Organization of Latin Americans (HOLA) for their Baila Con email from Anthony (Tony) Velazquez, Founder/CEO, 7/29/2025 Rocha Americans (HOLA) Dover Festival. dated 07/11/2025 6854 $ 250.00 $ 3,500.00 $ 21,500.00 Councilman Lewis authorized the designation of $500 of his community enhancement funds to the Hispanic Email from Brian Lewis dated 07/31/2025 and an Hispanic Organization of Latin Organization of Latin Americans (HOLA) for their Baila Con email from Anthony (Tony) Velazquez, Founder/CEO, 7/31/2025 Lewis Americans (HOLA) Dover Festival. dated 07/30/2025 6906 $ 500.00 $ 4,000.00 $ 21,000.00 Councilman Lewis authorized designation of $300 of his community enhancement funds to the Caribbean Culture Awareness Inc. for their 2nd Annual Delaware Caribbean Email from Brian Lewis dated 08/11/2025 and an 8/11/2025 Lewis Caribbean Culture Awareness Inc. Carnival. email from Eveann Fenty-Marseil dated 8/09/2025 6959 $300.00 $ 4,300.00 $ 20,700.00 Councilman Rocha authorized the designation of $500 of Email from Gerald Rocha dated 08/12/2025 and A 2nd Chance A Haven for Abused his community enhancement funds to Ms. Faye White at A email from City Clerk's Office dated 08/12/2025 8/12/2025 Rocha and Battered Woman and Children 2nd Chance, for their Annual Veterans Honorary Dinner 6959 $ 500.00 $ 4,800.00 $ 20,200.00 Councilman Neil authorized the designation of $100 of his Email from Fred Neil dated 08/12/2025 and email A 2nd Chance A Haven for Abused community enhancement funds to Ms. Faye White at A from City Clerk's Office dated 08/12/2025 8/12/2025 Neil and Battered Woman and Children 2nd Chance, for their Annual Veterans Honorary Dinner 6959 $100.00 $ 4,900.00 $ 20,100.00 Councilman Anderson authorized the designation of $200 of his community enhancement funds to Ms. Faye White Email from David Anderson dated 08/12/2025 and A 2nd Chance A Haven for Abused at A 2nd Chance, for their Annual Veterans Honorary email from City Clerk's Office dated 08/12/2025 8/12/2025 Anderson and Battered Woman and Children Dinner 6959 $ 200.00 $ 5,100.00 $ 19,900.00 Councilman Sudler authorized the designation of $500 of his community enhancement funds to the Hispanic Email from Roy Sudler dated 08/15/2025 and an Hispanic Organization of Latin Organization of Latin Americans (HOLA) for their Baila Con email from Anthony (Tony) Velazquez, Founder/CEO, 8/15/2025 Sudler Americans (HOLA) Dover Festival. dated 06/06/2025 7002 $ 500.00 $ 5,600.00 $ 19,400.00 Councilman Anderson authorized the designation of $750 of his community enhancement funds to Holy Trinity Email from David Anderson dated 08/19/2025 and 8/19/2025 Anderson Holy Trinity UAME Church UAME Church for their Back to School Book Bag Drive an email from Pastor Sheila Lomax dated 08/19/25 7002 $ 750.00 $ 6,350.00 $ 18,650.00 Councilwoman Pillsbury authorized the designation of $200 of her community enhancement funds to I Am My Email from Julia Pillsbury dated 09/4/2025 and an 9/8/2025 Pillsbury I Am My Sister's Keeper (MSK) Sister's Keeper (MSK) for their Founders Day email from Marcille Sewell-Liningham dated 09/4/25 7165 $ 200.00 $ 6,550.00 $ 18,450.00 Councilman Boggerty authorized the designation of $250 of his community enhancement funds to I Am My Sister's Email from Andre Boggerty dated 09/4/2025 and an 9/8/2025 Boggerty I Am My Sister's Keeper (MSK) Keeper (MSK) for their Founders Day email from Marcille Sewell-Liningham dated 09/4/25 7165 $ 250.00 $ 6,800.00 $ 18,200.00 Councilman Neil authorized the designation of $50 of his community enhancement funds to I Am My Sister's Keeper Email from Fred Neil dated 09/4/2025 and an email 9/8/2025 Neil I Am My Sister's Keeper (MSK) (MSK) for their Founders Day from Marcille Sewell-Liningham dated 09/4/25 7165 $ 50.00 $ 6,850.00 $ 18,150.00 Councilman Rocha authorized the designation of $200 of his community enhancement funds to 1NA Foundation for Email from Gerald Rocha dated 09/4/2025 and an 9/8/2025 Rocha 1NA Foundation their 2nd Annual 1NA Day of Giving Back email from Deanna Wright dated 09/4/25 7165 $ 200.00 $ 7,050.00 $ 17,950.00 Councilwoman Pillsbury authorized the designation of $200 of her community enhancement funds to 1NA Email from Julia Pillsbury dated 09/4/2025 and an 9/8/2025 Pillsbury 1NA Foundation Foundation for their 2nd Annual 1NA Day of Giving Back email from Deanna Wright dated 09/4/25 7165 $ 200.00 $ 7,250.00 $ 17,750.00 Councilman Boggerty authorized the designation of $300 of his community enhancement funds to 1NA Foundation Email from Andre Boggerty dated 09/12/2025 and an 9/16/2025 Boggerty 1NA Foundation for their 2nd Annual 1NA Day of Giving Back email from Deanna Wright dated 09/1/25 7121 $ 300.00 $ 7,550.00 $ 17,450.00 Councilwoman Hall authorized the designation of $500 of her community enhancement funds to The Veterans The Veterans Awareness Center Awareness Center Foundation Stand-Down for their 9/17/2025 Hall Foundation Stand-Down Delaware 2025 Veterans' Stand Down Email from Donyale Hall dated 09/17/2025 7263 $ 500.00 $ 8,050.00 $ 16,950.00 Councilman Anderson authorized the designation of $500 of his community enhancement funds to the Inner City Cultural League for their Martin Luther King Jr. National Email from David Anderson dated 10/16/2025 and a 10/16/2025 Anderson Inner City Cultural League Holiday Celebration letter from Reuben Salters dated 10/13/2025 7504 $ 500.00 $ 8,550.00 $ 16,450.00 Councilman Lewis authorized the designation of $200 of his community enhancement funds to the Hispanic Email from Brian Lewis dated 11/10/2025 and an Hispanic Organization of Latin Organization of Latin Americans (HOLA) for their Winter email from Anthony (Tony) Velazquez, Founder/CEO, 11/10/2025 Lewis Americans (HOLA) Wonderland Extravaganza Holiday Coat & Toy Giveaway dated 11/06/2025 7602 $ 200.00 $ 8,750.00 $ 16,250.00 Page 54

Item #17. TOTALS $ 8,750.00 $ 16,250.00 BUDGETED AMOUNT DISTRICT COUNCIL SPONSOR YTD EXPENDITURES BALANCE $ 5,000.00 At-Large Boggerty $ 900.00 $ 4,100.00 $ 2,500.00 1st District Pillsbury $ 800.00 $ 1,700.00 $ 2,500.00 1st District Rocha $ 1,150.00 $ 1,350.00 $ 2,500.00 2nd District Hall $ 700.00 $ 1,800.00 $ 2,500.00 2nd District Lewis $ 1,400.00 $ 1,100.00 $ 2,500.00 3rd District Arndt $ - $ 2,500.00 $ 2,500.00 3rd District Neil $150.00 $ 2,350.00 $ 2,500.00 4th District Anderson $ 2,150.00 $ 350.00 $ 2,500.00 4th District Sudler $ 1,500.00 $ 1,000.00 TOTAL $ 8,750.00 $ 16,250.00 Page 55

Item #18. CITY MANAGER’S MONTHLY REPORT October 2025 Page 56 1

Item #18. Blank Page Page 57 2

Item #18. Page 58 3

Item #18. CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE MONTHLY REPORT-OCTOBER 2025 December 1, 2025 Page 2 of 2 • Attended the Management Committee and Risk Management Committee meetings regarding electric (TEA) and the DEMEC Annual Board Meeting. • Attended the Kent Sussex Leadership Alliance luncheon and meeting. • Attended the DDP Board meeting. Discussed status of DDD project requests with DDP and consultant. Attending Mobility Center groundbreaking. • Worked with broker regarding property sales at Garrison Oak (ongoing discussions). • Regularly scheduled coordination with City Solicitor on pending legal matters. Continued meetings with outside counsel on legal matters. • Joined Chesapeake Utilities on trip to Bloom Energy and attended follow up meeting. • Participated in meetings with City and County leaders regarding planning to address future economic development concerns. • Met with potential applicant for city Economic Development Fund. Also reviewed and revised applicant form and guidelines. • Addressed a DOE grievance, participated in meetings regarding military leave, library security and meter reading. • Attended meetings regarding non-Bargaining pay scale. • Conducted semi-annual inspection of Fire Department (Station #2). If you have any questions or would like to discuss, please feel free to contact our office. City Manager Assistant City Manager P. 0. Box 475 Dover, DE 19903 Page 59 onmnmif!, �xctlie:nct toug'I) @uali1 ttbiu 4

Item #18. CENTRAL SERVICES MONTHLY REPORT October 2025 PROCUREMENT & INVENTORY DIVISION Purchase Orders for Stock by Fund FY 2026 to Date Difference from FY 2025 Electric $393,387.61 -284.2% Water $11,891.54 -289.6% Wastewater $0.00 0.0% General $47,365.45 22.5% Total $452,644.60 -252.4% Issues from Stock by Fund FY 2026 to Date Difference from FY 2025 Electric $385,552.70 -65.6% Water $48,522.16 -28.6% Wastewater $829.06 17.1% General $50,117.75 3.7% Total $485,021.67 -54.6% Bids/RFPs Solicited FY 2026 to Date Difference from FY 2025 18 -27.8% Money Spent for Postal Services FY 2026 to Date FY 2025 to Date $71,017.87 $74,730.47 Fuel Usage Type FY 2026 to Date FY 2025 to Date Unleaded 52,202 52,069 Diesel 23,819 28,434 Dollars Spent $177,383.67 $203,269.47 Page 60 5

Item #18. Warehouse Stock Value FY 2026 FY 2025 $5,800,228.65 $4,626,069.02 Purchase Orders for Stock are down 252.4% compared to this time last year. Issues from Stock are down 54.6% compared to this time last year. Bids/RFP's are down 27.8% compared to this time last year. Postal Expenses are down 5.2% compared to this time last year. Fuel Costs are down 14.6% compared to this time last year. Overall warehouse value is up 20.2% compared to this time last year. FLEET DIVISION PM Work Orders Scheduled: PM Work Orders Total Work Orders PM & 22 Completed: 58 Repair: 133 Total Hours Turned: Excess Hours Turned: Uncaptured Time: 313 0 182.2 MEASURE October 2025 October 2024 Completed PM's 58 51 DIFFERENCE 13.73% There were 22 PM's scheduled for this month. A total of 58 PM's were completed along with 75 repair work orders. There were a total of 133 work orders completed. Page 61 6

Item #18. FACILITIES DIVISION Routine Work Orders Emergency Work Orders Completed: 44 Completed: 10 City-owned Facility Work Events & Support Work Orders: 52 Orders: 2 MEASURE October 2025 October 2024 Completed Work Orders 54 85 DIFFERENCE -36.47% There were 54 routine and emergency Work Orders completed during this month. The work orders consisted of 52 for maintenance and repair of City-owned facilities and 2 related to events and other support work. Central Services Narrative Warehousing & Procurement is operating as normal. Project CS2502 contract award pending. Facilities is operating as normal; two positions posted. Fleet is operating as normal. Completed UTI (Air Brakes & Advanced Electrical) training 10/27/25- 10/31/25. Page 62 7

Item #18. CENTRAL SERVICES PROJECT UPDATE October 2025 FY/PROJECT NUMBER DEPARTMENT STATUS CITY HALL FC2601 QUOTING FLAT ROOF PEAR STREET FC2600 SCHEDULING VENDOR ABATEMENT CITY HALL FC2602 FIRE ALARM EQUIPMENT SCHEDULING VENDOR UPGRADE WEYANDT HALL EA2601 SCHEDULING VENDOR STAIRWELL FLOORING FUEL ISLAND CONTRACT AWARD CS2502 UPGRADE PENDING Page 63 8

Item #18. Recap of monthly activities / notations – As of October 31, 2025, the City of Dover served 25,266 electric utility customers, which is an increase in comparison to 25,159 in September 2024 and 13,334 water utility customers in comparison to 13,264 customers in 2024. Data is sourced from the Monthly Utility Bill Summary Report, which includes all utility rate classifications. The Customer Services Department has successfully on-boarded our newly hired candidate for the Customer Service Representative position and is currently being trained. The focus for disconnects remains as being done on Tuesdays and Wednesdays and reconnects being completed within the new metering staff on-call staff hours of Monday through Friday, from 5:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. The Department is preparing for upcoming holiday team building activites and festivities. Receivable Comparison FY 2025 to Utility Disconnections for October 2025 FY2026 to date (October 2025) 272 accounts were disconnected for non-payment of service. Compared to the same time last year the City had open receivables of Total receivable collected through the disconnection process $189,890.60. $11,165,290.79 vs $10,454,905.13. Ending Utility Receivable Due - $8,420,405.83. Customer Service Department Mission Continually provide quality public service to our diverse group of customers with professionalism, respect, & integrity. ~ City of Dover Customer Service Department Page 64 9

Item #18. Number of Deeds Stamped for Transfer Tax Dollar Amount for the Month of Oct. 2024/2025 the Month of Oct. 2024/2025 26 24 24 25 $400 30 23 Thousands 25 18 $233 20 $200 15 $92 $98 3 1 $54$54 $3 $1 10 0 3 2024 $0 2024 5 $0 0 2025 2025 First Time Buyer for the Month Oct. 2024/2025 Realty Property of Oct. 2024/2025 Sales in Dollars Received Prior 26 to Recording 26 25 $20 $16 $15 $6 $7 $7 $7 Millions 25 Res. Non-First $10 $0 $0 $0 24 24 Time Buyers $5 2024 24 $0 Res. First Time 2025 Buyers 23 2024 2025 Major Updates August September October Assessment Change $0 $4,359,800 -$220,900 Residential Sales Ratio Report Sales in Study Total Assessed Total Sale Price Ratio PRD Value 38 $6,364,000 $ 10,706,850 0.59 0.99 Ratio – Assessed Value divided by Sale Price. PRD – Mean – A PRD above 1.03 tends to indicate assessment regressivity – high valued properties are under appraised relative to low valued properties. A PRD below .98 tends to indicate assessment progressivity – high valued properties are relatively over appraised. Page 65 10

Item #18. Tax Office Wild Meadows / Persimmon Park Place Home Sales for October 2025: Property Address Assessed Value Sales Price N/A N/A N/A Supplemental Billing • October Supplements Bills were generated totaling $10,549.06 Page 66 11

012ÿ456ÿ4547 5ÿ 89 ÿ191ÿ1 ÿ ÿ 12 ÿ ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ 84 9 0=> ?8   ?09   =  19   8 ? 1 ÿ ÿ 98   !"  "' (" "!"ÿ*+,,-*+(.ÿ/0 " "$ !"" " "## ,; 18 ÿÿÿÿÿ!!"<" %+/0! ÿÿÿÿÿ$"< ÿ $  "!!"#  % (" "ÿ,120(1-ÿ( " "$ "&&# " !&&# 1 18 ÿÿÿÿÿ%!< %"+/0! ÿÿÿÿÿ!< ÿ ! # "!"  "' (" "$ÿ3/4ÿ( " "$ "&#$ " "$'$ / 18 ÿÿÿÿÿ!""< %"+/0! ÿÿÿÿÿ"#< ÿ" !" # !$"  "' (" "ÿ,(15-675ÿ( "  "&'& ! !#&! 1 18 ÿÿÿÿÿ!#<$ %"+/0! ÿÿÿÿÿ$"< ÿ $ # "%"$  % (" !&ÿ*+-214ÿ/0 " "$ "&# " "#% ,; 18 ÿÿÿÿÿ"''< "#+/0! ÿÿÿÿÿ%< ÿ $ # "!"$  ! (" "%!ÿ5ÿ155ÿ18 " "$ "& " # / 18 ÿÿÿÿÿÿ&< !+/0! ÿÿÿÿÿ!"< ÿ $! # """!  " (" #!#ÿ91(ÿ.0 "  "&! ! "## /; 18 ÿÿÿÿÿ"'< %"+/0! ÿÿÿÿÿ!#< ÿ  # ""!&  " (" %"ÿ5ÿ6.0ÿ.0 "  "&% ! "$$ /; : ÿÿÿÿÿ"<# %"+/0! ÿÿÿÿÿ!#< ÿ  # "&"!  "# (" "ÿ*(701:ÿ( " "% "&## ! "!&! / 18 ÿÿÿÿÿ""'<% "+/0! ÿÿÿÿÿ!%< ÿ  # "&"!!  "# (" !ÿ*(701:ÿ( " "% "&## ! "!%! / 18 ÿÿÿÿÿ""&<# %+/0! ÿÿÿÿÿ"#< ÿ # ' &!'  "% (" '!ÿ,1/+5ÿ18 " "$ "&& " "!# / : ÿÿÿÿÿ"<% %+/0! ÿÿÿÿÿ%$<& ÿ " ' "!"'  "% (" '"ÿ0+65.5ÿ,28 " " "&# " "$$ / 18 ÿÿÿÿÿ"'<% +/0! ÿÿÿÿÿ!&< ÿ $ ' "%"#  "% (" &&!ÿ,+::.ÿ( " "$ "&$ " & / 18 ÿÿÿÿÿ"%$<% !%+/0! ÿÿÿÿÿ!< ÿ ! ' "%"$ %" ( !!ÿ/*10*13ÿ/0 " "% "&'' ! !!$' , 18 ÿÿÿÿÿ"%#< !#+/0! ÿÿÿÿÿ!< ÿ  12 Page 67 Item #18.

012ÿ456ÿ4547 5ÿ 89 ÿ191ÿ1 ÿ ÿ 12 ÿ ÿ4ÿÿÿÿÿÿ 84 9 0?@ A8   A09   ?  19   8 A 1 ÿ ÿ 98    !"#" ' ( '!ÿ*+,-./(ÿ(  & # $ $# 3= 5 ÿÿÿÿÿ ># '.36$ ÿÿÿÿÿ$> ÿ"%&  !"##$" % ( $!ÿ+0(12,3ÿ(  ' &! $ && 3 0( ÿÿÿÿÿÿ &>' #.36$ ÿÿÿÿÿ&> ÿ"'  !"%#&" ! ( # ÿ(.,4ÿ( ' & " ## 3= 2; ÿÿÿÿÿ!>  $!.36$ ÿÿÿÿÿ$&> ÿ"  !"% '"$ ! ( %ÿ/2+-*,56.,ÿ+6  # &&  $!! 3 2; ÿÿÿÿÿ$'>' '.36$ ÿÿÿÿÿ$ > ÿ"#%  !"&#%" # ( %ÿ78*,56.,ÿ07  ' $! $ $$! 3= 5 ÿÿÿÿÿ&>' $&.36$ ÿÿÿÿÿ''> ÿ"% % "'##'"  ( '$!ÿ5*77*9(..:ÿ7,  # $  $ # 9= 2; ÿÿÿÿÿ$#&>  &.36$ ÿÿÿÿÿ#'> ÿ" $ % "#"$ ( ' ÿ3.1(6+*ÿ(  $ &%!  ! 3 2; ÿÿÿÿÿÿ# >! %.36$ ÿÿÿÿÿ> ÿ"# % "#"#&$ ( '&ÿ02(ÿ-2;,ÿ(  $ &%!  ! 3 2; ÿÿÿÿÿÿ# >! .36$ ÿÿÿÿÿÿ!> ÿ" % " $" # ( 'ÿ-26-(<*7ÿ/24 ! &&$ $ #! 3= 5 ÿÿÿÿÿ'>' '.36$ ÿÿÿÿÿ$&> ÿ"' % " $"' ( &ÿ.;(ÿ-277ÿ  $ &%'  %&# 9 5 ÿÿÿÿÿÿ>'  .36$ ÿÿÿÿÿ> ÿ" 13 Page 68 Item #18.

012ÿ456ÿ4547 5ÿ 89 ÿ191ÿ1 ÿ ÿ 12 ÿ ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ 84 9 023 48   409   2  19   8 4 1 ÿ ÿ 98    !"#$#!!%$!% &  'ÿ)*&+,)ÿ)*++ÿ % %'" % "'- . ÿÿÿÿÿÿ / !0,1! ÿÿÿÿÿ%/ ÿ$# 14 Page 69 Item #18.

012ÿ456ÿ4547 5ÿ 89 ÿ191ÿ1 ÿ ÿ 12 ÿ ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ 84 9 0>? @8   @09   >  19   8 @ 1 ÿ ÿ 98    !"#$#! !%$ %" (% %%%ÿ*+,,-./+0ÿ-0 % %'  ##& ,! 18 ÿÿÿÿÿ&=" %#!+*/! ÿÿÿÿÿ# = ÿ$#  !"#$%%!%!$  (% &ÿ,(/(10ÿ( % %# %'# % # * 18 ÿÿÿÿÿ=& %!+*/! ÿÿÿÿÿ&= ÿ$#  !"#$%&!%!%$ %# (% %#%ÿ2ÿ0+(/3ÿ./ % %& %''" % '' * 18 ÿÿÿÿÿ=& %&!+*/! ÿÿÿÿÿ#'=' ÿ$#  !"#$!%!%#$ (% ÿ.3(2++ÿ*/ % %# %' ' % %'  *< 18 ÿÿÿÿÿ%"=' % !+*/! ÿÿÿÿÿ'= ÿ$#  !"#$!%!%$ (% %"ÿ.3(2++ÿ*/ % %# %' ' % %"" *< 18 ÿÿÿÿÿ%=  !+*/! ÿÿÿÿÿ'= ÿ$#  !"#$!&!%$ (% "ÿ24+5607ÿ18 % %& %''# %  *< 18 ÿÿÿÿÿ"= !+*/! ÿÿÿÿÿ#= ÿ$##  !""$ !!&$ ' ( #ÿ.ÿ7+8(0+(.ÿ18 % %'%  %'%" * 18 ÿÿÿÿÿ%&=& &!+*/! ÿÿÿÿÿ%= ÿ$&  !""$%%! !%$ # (% ÿ-14ÿ,97ÿ( % %  % ,! 18 ÿÿÿÿÿ%"#= '!+*/! ÿÿÿÿÿ= ÿ$   !""$%"! !% $ & (% %ÿ+(*31(ÿ18 % %& %'  % %%% * 18 ÿÿÿÿÿ%#=' #!+*/! ÿÿÿÿÿ"=% ÿ$&  !""$%"!#! $% % (% %%%%ÿ5+0(+ÿ/( %   '& ,< 18 ÿÿÿÿÿ=' %!+*/! ÿÿÿÿÿ&'= ÿ$#  ! $!!#%$ % (% "ÿ:6-(.ÿ7(0 % %'#"  ' *< 18 ÿÿÿÿÿ&= '!+*/! ÿÿÿÿÿ&"='  ÿ$  ! $%!!&%$ % (% &ÿ;+./ÿ,-8 % %& %'# % %%&& * 18 ÿÿÿÿÿ%%=#  !+*/! ÿÿÿÿÿ= ÿ$&  !#$ !%! $ % (% 'ÿ-4003180ÿ( % %& %' # % %& * 7 ÿÿÿÿÿ%##=' !+*/! ÿÿÿÿÿ%"= ÿ$' 15 Page 70 Item #18.

Item #18. ELECTRIC DEPARTMENT MONTHLY REPORT For the month of October 2025, the Electric Department contributed to the quality of life for all our customers. The city experienced a system peak of 105.7 megawatts, a decrease of 21.4 megawatts from last month and a 11.3 megawatt increase from the same month last year. There was a total of 14 outages for the month, affecting a total of 5833 customers with an average outage time of 47.46 minutes. For the month we had six fuses blow on six different circuits with causes being a limb, bad transformer, squirrel and three unknown causes. There was one instance of an underground service hit by a fencing company and two instances of feeder breakers operating with no causes found. Project Updates: The department continues to work on FY26 projects. The team completed work on compiling information for the annual Renewable Portfolio Standards Report and submitted it to Legislature. We also completed pole testing and are developing a plan to replace the approximately 200 bad poles across the service area. Garrison Oak Substation is still progressing. The steel poles were delivered as scheduled and are slated to be installed next month. Crews also worked to install several aerial switches in the new substation. Van Sant was not dispatched by PJM for the month of October and was in a scheduled outage from Oct 20th through November 17th. All tasks were completed, and the unit was put back in service as scheduled. Due to an update to the tracking system we use to collect our data from some information previously included in this report is not available for this report. FY 26 YTD Outages and Response Time: Total – 33 Average Response Time – 23.8 minutes (Goal – Less than 30 minutes) Lost Time Accidents – Workorders Generated – Current Month – 0 Total FY – 0 Current Month – 199 Total FY – 714 Historical Peak Load 180 160 140 120 100 2022 Megawatts 2023 80 2024 60 2025 40 20 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Page 71 16

Item #18. Emergency Management and Communications The Department of Emergency Management and Communications is dedicated to protecting lives, property, and the well-being of our community through coordinated emergency preparedness, effective communication, and responsive public safety services. Through transparent public information and proactive community engagement, we strive to build trust, enhance readiness, and strengthen the City’s resilience before, during, and after any crisis. We oversee and support Emergency Management, Emergency Medical Services, Public Communications, and the Office of the Fire Marshal, ensuring rapid, professional, and compassionate response to emergencies. Director Kay M. Sass Deputy Director & Fire Marshal Jason A. Osika Deputy Fire Marshal’s FM2 Matthew C. Brown FM3 Phillip M. Lewis FM4 Sean P.M. Christiansen EMS Primary Contacts: Senior Regional Director of Operations Tyler Selak Dover EMS Division Chief Michael Jenkins Page 72 17

Item #18. Fire Marshal’s Office - At a Glance The Fire Marshal’s Office investigated 7 incidents during the month of October. One of these incidents resulted in a fire fatality from smoking while on oxygen. Staff is conducting restaurant annual fire and life safety inspections. Staff assisted with fire drills at Bayhealth. Matt Brown continues to assist with the building department as the liaison to the third party plan reviewer. Month Year to Date Previous Year to Date Annual Fire & Life Safety Inspections 23 140 127 Deficiencies From the Above Inspections 10 104 243 Fire Code Violations/Deficiencies/Complaints 21 73 119 C/O & Fire Equipment Acceptance Tests 13 85 32 Meetings & Walk Through 19 90 52 Fire Plan Review & DAC 9 43 43 Month Year to Date Previous Year to Date Accidental 4 totaling $1,001 12 totaling $124,708 23 totaling $412,101 Incendiary 0 4 totaling $2,200 4 totaling $2,002 Undetermined 3 totaling $3 5 totaling $100.503 5 totaling $513,600 Natural 0 1 totaling $1,000 0 Investigation time 10 hours 43 hours 93 hours Injuries 1 3 10 Deaths 1 1 0 Page 73 Arrest Made with DPD 0 0 0 18

EMS OCTOBER 2025 Item #18. RUN VOLUME: A total of 1180 responses by Dover EMS for the month. Of those 1180, 837 required transport (890 patients) 259 received services and did not transport and 84 cancelled or refused. Sick persons was the most frequent calls, followed by MVC’s, and “unknown problems” at time of dispatch. Average Response Times: State of Delaware compliance requirements are that 90% of responses be below the response time guidelines. Dover EMS exceeded the 90% minimum in every category. Alpha 9.1 min. 96.38% (Low priority - Ie: non life threatening Ie: non serious illness, back pain, flu like symptoms) Bravo 7.2 min. 94.65% (Moderate Priority - Ie: minor allergic reaction, fainted now alert) Charlie 6.9 min. 99.64% (Urgent - Ie: difficulty breathing, severe abdominal pain, diabetic emergency) Delta 6.2 min. 99.64% (High Priority - ie: cardiac arrest, not breathing severe trauma or choking, childbirth complications) Echo 3.3 min. 100% (Highest priority - Ie: cardiac arrest confirmed, not breathing at all, mass casualty, CPR in progress) Omega 9 min. 100% (Lowest Priority - Ie: Minor nosebleed, non injury fall assist) Provided services for the following community events: DSU Homecoming, Stand by for DSU Football games, Stand by for DHS Football Games, Multiple Trunk or Treat Events, Executed contract with Bally’s for Horse Races Education: All Dover EMS providers received an emergency pediatric care course Taught CPR and AED class to City of Dover staff Additional information: 30 Total Surge Emergencies - Surge emergences refer to situations where the demand for EMS exceeds normal capacity causing the implementation of a surge plan (Bringing on additional units) 17 Total Surge Unit Activations with Transports 6 dispatches with a 27– Run Card (Penetrating Trauma) - 6 patients transported (ie: gunshot wound, stab wounds, other types of impalements) Average response time 3 min 57 seconds Dover was dispatched out of district 36 times, and transported 20 of those. Total calls handled by mutual aid into Dover is 13. (1.1% of run volume) 7.6% of the overall calls were individuals without a home. Page 74 19

Item #18. HUMAN RESOURCES OCTOBER 2025 City of Dover Human Resources Mission Statement: The City of Dover’s Human Resources Department strives to provide quality service to assist our greatest asset, our employees. Equity, Integrity, and Urgency is our focus to ensure employee satisfaction as well as company wellness. We implement policies and procedures that align with organizational goals, including a safe and compliant workplace, effective training and professional development, and addressing both the needs of employees and the organization. City of Dover Human Resources Value Statement: Innovation: We strive to include best HR practices to enhance a robust technological movement to enhance the quality and efficiency of the department. Collaboration: We honor knowledge sharing, diversity of thoughts and ideas, and experiences to encourage an inclusive workforce. Integrity and Transparency: We honor our commitments and promote a healthy environment that promotes fairness, honesty, respect, and trust. Results Driven: Customer service is front and center, and we advocate for employees' and retirees’ needs at all times. OCTOBER SUMMARY: OCTOBER Hiring Trends FY26: MONTH NEW HIRE AMOUNT STATUS OCTOBER 3 3 FT OCTOBER Voluntary Termination/Involuntary Termination Trends FY26: VOLUNTARY 1 FT INVOLUNTARY 0 FT RETIREMENT 1 FT Page 75 20

Item #18. HUMAN RESOURCES OCTOBER EEO DATA EEO DATA 2% 3% 2% 2% 16% 75% AMERICAN INDIAN ASIAN AFRICAN AMERICAN CAUCASIAN HISPANIC OTHER RACE AMERICAN INDIAN 2% ASIAN 2% AFRICAN AMERICAN 16% CAUCASIAN 75% HISPANIC 3% OTHER RACE 2% Page 76 21

Item #18. HUMAN RESOURCES OCTOBER EEO DEMOGRAPHICS EEO DEMOGRAPHICS OTHER RACE 8 MINORITY 93 CAUCASIAN 298 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 OTHER RACE 8 MINORITY 93 CAUCASIAN 298 Page 77 22

Item #18. HUMAN RESOURCES OCTOBER GENDER REPORT GENDER REPORT 0% 29% 71% FEMALE MALE NONBINARY MALES 71% FEMALE 29% NON-BINARY 0% Page 78 23

Item #18. HUMAN RESOURCES FULL-TIME VS. PART-TIME EE’S FULL-TIME VS. PART-TIME EE'S 450 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC FULL TIME PART TIME TOTAL EE'S Numbers do not reflect committees, or council members. Page 79 24

Item #18. HUMAN RESOURCES OCTOBER INTERNAL EE AGE DEMOGRAPHICS AGE DEMOGRAPHICS 18-24 6% 25-34 16% 35-44 23% 45-54 23% 55-64 25% 65+ 7% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% AGE PERCENTAGE 18-24 6% 25-34 16% 35-44 23% 45-54 23% 55-64 25% 65 + 7% Page 80 25

Item #18. HUMAN RESOURCES HIRING DETAILS Position Hired: ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT, ACCOUNT CLERK, CUSTOMER SERVICE DIRECTOR Transferred/Promoted: Position Terminated/Resigned/Retired/Other: 2 FT POLICE OFFICERS Terminal Leave: N/A CURRENT VACANT POSITIONS *Not used for Budgeting Purposes Page 81 26

Item #18. HUMAN RESOURCES TURNOVER STATISTICS Page 82 27

Item #18. HUMAN RESOURCES Page 83 28

Item #18. HUMAN RESOURCES Page 84 29

Item #18. HUMAN RESOURCES OCTOBER WORKER’S COMPENSATION DATA MONTH SEPTEMBER-25 OCTOBER-25 WORKERS COMP INJURY DETAIL 5 4 Respectfully Submitted by H. Naomi Poole Page 85 30

Item #18. Information Technology Department September 2025 Report Network Infrastructure Modernization: Server and SAN Upgrade Project The IT Department is in the final stages of defining the scope for a comprehensive upgrade and modernization of the City’s network infrastructure. This initiative focuses on enhancing the performance, reliability, and security of our core systems, including servers and Storage Area Networks (SANs). Once the scope is finalized, IT will present its findings and recommendations to City Council and executive leadership. The presentation will outline specific infrastructure improvements aimed at strengthening the City’s digital backbone and ensuring long-term scalability and resilience. Staffing and Talent Development We are pleased to announce that the vacant LAN Technician position has been successfully filled. Dane Strosnider joins the team, bringing a strong blend of technical expertise, customer service acumen, and community-focused IT experience. His background includes service with Kent County IT and a non-profit organization, where he managed both on-premises and cloud-based systems, as well as audiovisual and multimedia technologies. His skill set aligns closely with the City of Dover’s IT priorities, making him an immediate and seamless addition to our team. Recruitment is currently underway for the remaining vacancy: LAN Analyst. Interviews are scheduled, and we anticipate filling the position in the coming weeks. Once fully staffed, we expect to see measurable improvements in Help Desk response times, project execution, and the timely completion of documentation and close-out activities. Looking ahead, the department remains committed to workforce development and is actively engaged in our partnership with Delaware Technical Community College’s ITN program. We plan to continue hosting interns to support both student learning and departmental capacity. Cybersecurity Awareness Month – October 2025 October marks Cybersecurity Awareness Month, and the IT Department is preparing a series of initiatives to promote safe online practices and reinforce our digital defenses. With cyber threats evolving rapidly, it is essential that all employees remain vigilant and informed. Page 86 31

Item #18. Throughout the month, IT will host interactive training sessions, distribute educational materials, and lead awareness campaigns to empower staff with the knowledge and tools to protect City systems and data. Participation from all departments is encouraged to foster a culture of shared responsibility in cybersecurity. Upcoming IT Projects – Funded by FY23 SLCSG Grant We are excited to report that the Delaware Emergency Management Agency (DEMA) has granted final approval for our Federal FY23 State and Local Cybersecurity Grant (SLCSG) funding request. With this funding secured, the IT Department will begin scheduling and initiating the following high-priority projects in the coming weeks: 1. Network Server and SAN Upgrades – Modernizing core infrastructure to improve performance and security. 2. City Hall Wiring and Wireless Access Enhancements – Upgrading cabling and expanding wireless coverage for improved connectivity. 3. Windows 10 to Windows 11 Migration – Transitioning City workstations to the latest supported operating system. 4. Transition to .gov Domain – Enhancing trust and security by migrating City web and email services to a .gov domain. These projects represent a significant step forward in our mission to deliver secure, efficient, and future-ready technology services to the City of Dover. Page 87 32

Item #18. Information Technology Department October 2025 Report Cybersecurity Month The City of Dover participated in the nationwide Cybersecurity Awareness Month with initiatives to promote safer online practices for our staff to strengthen our digital defenses from evolving Cyber threats. During the month, IT offered a series of interactive training sessions and awareness activities to help our users stay up on current threats, best practices, and what’s ahead this month. Every Wednesday during the month of October IT sent quick tips via email on how to spot phishing email, also during the month staff completed our annual cybersecurity online training. IT Staffing The IT Department is pleased to announce that we have hired a new LAN/Analyst to fill out our department’s staff. Tori Carney has accepted the position and will start the beginning of November. Ms. Carney received her formal IT training at Delaware Tech Community College while in addition gained hands-on technical skills via internships and customer service skills working retail jobs with customer interaction. Ms. Carney was selected based on her internship experience here in the City of Dover, her strong customer services skills, her local availability, and her experience with our IT Department operations made her the strongest candidate for the IT LAN/Analyst position in the City of Dover's Information Technology Department and will allow Ms. Carney to integrate immediately with the team. IT Support: The IT Department’s goal is to reduce the time we respond to and resolve technical issues that the users may have. We have seen a significate decrease in Tyler support tickets and an overall decrease in support ticket resolution times. Now that the IT department is fully staff, I expect the support times will continue to improve over the next quarter. Page 88 33

Item #18. IT Projects: IT continues to scope out plans to upgrade and modernize our network infrastructure by investigating specific improvements, such as enhanced better multifactor authentication, strengthening our network logging and monitoring tools, ensuring robust backup capabilities, adding redundancy to systems. IT will present its preliminary project plan to City Councill in November for consideration. Other IT capital projects are in the planning initiation stages. 1) Network Server and SAN’s upgrades. 2) City Hall A/V system upgrade. 3) City Hall wiring and wireless access upgrades. 4) Windows 10 to Windows 11 PC software upgrade. 5) Transition to .gov domain for city email. Page 89 34

Reference Transactions October 2025 Item #18. Adults 764 Teens 114 Children 235 0 250 500 750 1000 1250 1500 1750 2000 Circulation Oct. '25 FYTD '26 Oct. '24 FYTD '25 City of Dover Residents 9,430 39,635 9,680 43,909 Electronic Materials 8,274 34,090 7,730 28,513 Kent County Residents 10,179 42,553 11,150 44,400 Non-County Residents 1,062 5,423 1,329 5,442 New Library Registrations City of Dover Residents 270 1,257 205 1,062 Kent County Residents 136 650 91 474 Non-County Residents 10 28 1 20 Registered Library Users as of 10/31/2025 Registered Library Users as of 10/31/2024 City of Dover Residents 19,138 19,880 Kent County Residents 10,154 9,391 Non-County Residents 678 697 TOTAL 29,970 29,968 Other Visitors 15,011 61,959 13,806 62,189 Meeting Room Attendance 3,441 11,269 3,689 13,520 Number of Computer Users 1,600 6,489 N/A 4,075 Number of Wireless Computer Users 1,763 6,605 1,382 6,384 Inter/Intralibrary - Loaned 47 34 Inter/Intralibrary - Borrowed 79 75 Holds Sent 2,780 2,508 Holds Received 1,790 1,910 TOTAL 4,696 18,550 4,527 16,488 Tech Services/Items Added 1,257 1,142 Tech Services/Items Deleted 1,263 1,441 Passport Services/Customers 160 809 186 898 Passport Services/Revenue $6,530 $31,505 $7,993 $36,536 Monthly Highlights ►996 attended 55 programs for adults. ►166 attended 24 program for teens. ►1,967 attended 38 programs for children. ► 0 volunteers. Program Spotlight 0 Page 90 35

Item #18. Parks & Recreation Monthly Report – October 2025 PARKS & RECREATION HIGHLIGHTS Dover Park Building and Spray Pad: Please visit our web page for frequent updates: https:// www.cityofdover.gov/departments/ParksRecreation/Splashpadandcommunitycenter All Accessible Playground: Will begin construction once the building and spray pad are complete. Skate Park: Staff are working with WRA on final design for bidding project. Parks & Recreation: Volunteered at the Halloween Trunk or Treat Bash hosted by Dover PD. Grounds Department: Tulips for Spring 2026 are now planted. The Gardeners planted an array of mums throughout the city. Holiday Food Drive & Capital Holiday Festival Coming Soon!! Outdoor Sports & Leagues FY 26 General Participant & Spectator Count Recreation Sports Activity Participants Spectators Location Leagues Soccer Clinics 221 442 Schutte Park Trips For Her Basketball 20 55 Schutte Park Bldg, Field, Kent County Senior Pavilion & Stage 155 355 Schutte Park Softball Camps October 2025 October 2024 General Recreation $2336.00 General Recreation $1706.96 Sports $590.00 Sports $1,326.00 Leagues $7,120.00 Leagues $8,100.00 Trips $3,388 Trips $2,925.00 Bldg, Field Pavilion Bldg, Field Pavilion $575.00 $880.00 Stage Permits Stage Permits Camps $0.00 Camps $0.00 Parks & Recreation FYTD FYTD Oct 25 Oct 24 Programs 26 25 General Recreation 173 846 202 763 Open Gym 160 289 131 323 Sports 130 154 215 442 Leagues (Inside) 2,481 9,206 2,522 9,706 Bldg, Field, Facility, 101 221 13 63 Stage permits Camps 0 1,700 0 1,609 Page 91 36

Item #18. Grounds Monthly Report Arborist Crew October-2025 Tree Work Completed Tree's Trimmed 74 Arborist Crew: Tree's Removed 1 Root Pruning 0 - Trim trees and cleanup on plaza Stumps Removed 3 - Christmas lights started Trees Planted 0 - Clean up from Costal Storms Beautification Crew: Litter Cans Collected - Removed annuals from flower beds 800 - Planted tulips 600 - Spray weeds 400 200 Mowing Crew: 0 - All mowing crews cutting grass on schedule Jan Feb Mar April May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec - Spraying weeds 2022 2023 2024 2025 Litter Removal: - Litter route is being picked up on schedule Trees Removed - 375 Trash cans picked up 80 Parks Crew: 60 40 - Maintain parks & Fields 20 - Assisted gardeners with tulip planting 0 Jan Feb Mar April May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Miscellaneous: - Bush hog right of way, out falls and other city locations 2022 2023 2024 2025 - Spraying city parks and property Trees Trimmed 300 200 100 0 Jan Feb Mar April May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec 2022 2023 2024 2025 Page 92 37

Item #18. City Planner’s Monthly Report Department of Planning & Inspections October 2025 Planning & Inspections Highlights Some Items to Call to Your Attention Planning Office staff reviewed 57 Building Permits and 14 Certificate of Occupancy Permits. Staff also provided support to the Planning Commission (6 applications) and the Board of Adjustment (1 application). The Historic District Commission did not meet in October due to a lack of agenda items. Three (3) vacancies remain including the Director, a Planner II and a Planner I. Interviews were conducted in October for these positions. Due to these vacancies, the Department continues to utilize a consultant to assist staff in addressing the current workload. Due to a forthcoming retirement, the Community Development Manager has been working with her replacement, providing training, to ensure the program will continue efficiently. The Department of Housing and Urban Development approved the 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan and the 2025 Action Plan for the City of Dover. So far this year, three families have purchased homes utilizing the Homeownership Assistance Program. Construction activity continued in October with both residential and non-residential projects having Building Permits and Certificates of Occupancy issued. Residential development areas consisted of Eden Hill Farm TND, the Villages of Maple Dale, Rojan Meadows PND, and two single family dwellings in the Downtown Development District Area. Non-residential building permits included several small office renovation projects and a Temporary Locker Room Building at the Delaware State University Stadium. Overall, 138 permits were issued resulting in 369 inspections. The Inspections Division consists of both Building Inspections and Permitting & Licensing. Within Building Inspections, two (2) vacancies remained for the Chief Building Inspector and a Building Inspector I in October. In order to ensure construction activity is not stalled, the Department continues to utilize a contractor to assist in Building Permit/Plan reviews as well as with Building Inspections as needed. Code Enforcement staff conducted Annual Housing Inspections (18 cases) as part of the Rental Dwelling Permit program. Other Code Enforcement cases focused on exterior property maintenance issues/violations (26 cases), tall grass and weeds violations (8 cases) and Dover Code of Ordinance violations (46 cases). October ended with 120 registered vacant buildings, 60 dangerous buildings, and 7,864 active rental dwelling units. Code Enforcement had two (2) vacancies in October. Page 93 38

Item #18. Planning Office Operations • The Meetings of the Boards and Commission supported by the Planning Office are presented in the Hybrid format with both In-Person and Virtual (using Webex) meeting options for participation. Conducting Meetings and Trainings in virtual formats are also offered. Meetings in October included several project informational meetings, the Downtown Development District Administrators Workshop, and the Annual Conference on Historic Preservation sponsored by Preservation Delaware. • The Planning Office is part of the review process for certain types of construction activity permits (Building Permits, Sign Permits, etc.) and Certificate of Occupancy permits to confirm compliance with the Zoning Ordinance provisions. For October 2025, Planning Staff was involved with the review of 57 Building Permits and 14 Certificates of Occupancy that were issued for a monthly total of 71 and a year-to-date total of 722. The 2025 year-to-date tally as compared to the calendar year totals of Permits and COs is less than the totals seen in 2024 at 782 and lower than the 2023 totals at 925. Staff also reviews new applications for Business Licenses and Rental Dwelling Permits. Other Office Divisions Operations • Ray Morris (Code Enforcement Inspector) retired in October 2025 from City service. Planning & Inspections Revenue Revenue Stream FY 2026 Revenue FY2026 Actual % of Budget Estimates from (YTD) October Budget 2025 Business License $1,540,000 $ 1,517,560 99% Manufactured Home License $16,000 $ 13,684 86% Building Permits $500,000 $ 256,416 51% Cert. of Occupancy $9,000 $ 3,480 39% Public Occupancy $45,000 $ 2,980 7% Lodging House $28,000 $ 922 3% Plumbing/Heating/Air $110,000 $ 31,848 29% Rental Inspection Fee $750,000 $ 11,674 2% Miscellaneous $21,000 $ 6,216 30% Fire Protection Fees $100,000 $ 31,801 32% Code Enforcement Fines $80,000 $ 23,450 29% Vacant Building Reg. $50,000 $ 23,625 47% Total P&I Revenue $3,249,000 $ 1,923,656 59% Page 94 39

Item #18. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IMPLEMENTATION 2019 Comprehensive Plan Implementation of the 2019 Comprehensive Plan continues as Departments citywide focus on the plan implementation items as found in Implementation Plan (Chapter 15) items such as the projects, studies, code amendments, and other activities. A copy of the Final Plan (as amended) is available on the Comprehensive Plan website: https://www.cityofdover.gov/2019-comprehensive-plan Visit the Dover Parcel and Zoning Viewer on the City’s website www.cityofdover.gov to see zoning information for properties located in Dover. Use the Quick Link on the GIS Division page to reach the Viewer: https://doverde.maps.arcgis.com/home/index.html OTHER ACTIVITIES • Downtown Dover Strategic Master Plan: The Downtown Dover Partnership’s Strategic Master Plan is known as “Transforming Downtown Dover: Capital City 2030” (January 2023). Various partners are focusing on aspects of Plan implementation. The Downtown Dover Partnership is moving forward with planning for the development of priority project sites. Also, the City is involved in planning for water and sanitary sewer improvement projects for the Loockerman Street corridor. The key priority project of the Dover Mobility Center held a groundbreaking ceremony on October 14, 2025 and it’s working to finalize its Site Plan approval (S-25-01/HI-25-01). CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES • In October 2025, Residential Building Permits were issued for two Duplex units (D.R. Horton) in Eden Hill Farm TND; four Townhouse units in the Villages of Maple Dale; and a single family detached dwelling on N. New Street in the Downtown Development District Area. • Temporary Certificates of Occupancy were issued to two single family detached dwellings in Eden Hill Farm TND. Certificates of Occupancy were issued for four (4) Duplex units and a single family detached dwelling in Eden Hill Farm TND; a single family detached dwelling on Fulton Street in the Downtown Development District Area; and for six (6) Townhouse units in Rojan Meadows PND. • Building Permits issued in October were for several small office renovation projects and a Temporary Locker Room Building at the Delaware State University Stadium. • There were no Certificates of Occupancy issued for non-residential/commercial projects. OCT 2025 (FY26) TOTAL FOR FY26 New Home Permits Issued 7 34 Value of Commercial Projects $317,498.00 $16,731,880.00 Downtown Incentives (Fees Waived) $2,228.20 $4,681.40 Page 95 40

Item #18. 2025: Welcome to Dover! Progress in Pictures—Under Construction Rojan Meadows PND (226 thru 241) 241 N. Ann Avenue 526 Fulton Street Page 96 41

Item #18. BOARD AND COMMISSION ACTIVITY Boards & Commissions There were Meetings in October of the Boards and Commissions supported by the Planning Office. The Planning Commission met on October 20, 2025 to consider two Requests for Extension, a Rezoning Application, and three Site Plan Applications. The Board of Adjustment met on October 15, 2025 for a variance application. The Historic District Commission did not meet in October. Historic District Commission: The Historic District did not meet on October 16, 2025. The next Historic District Commission meeting is scheduled for November 20, 2025. Board of Adjustment: The Board of Adjustment met on October 15, 2025. The next Board of Adjustment meeting is scheduled for November 19, 2025. • Application #V-25-05 Property at 640 South State Street for the Bayhealth Medical Center – Kent Campus. The Board of Adjustment moved for approval for two Variances from the requirements of Zoning Ordinance, Article 4 §4.15 as associated with a proposed 10-story Hospital Bed Tower Building Addition. Variance Request #1 seeks to increase the allowable height from 150 feet to 175 feet for a new 10-story Hospital Bed Tower. Variance Request #2 seeks a reduction of the minimum 10-foot front yard setback to allow for building encroachment of the Bed Tower Elevators and Stairs where adjacent to South Street. The property is zoned IO (Institutional and Office Zone) and partially subject to the SWPOZ (Source Water Protection Overlay Zone). The owner of record is Bayhealth Medical Center, Inc. Property Addresses: 640 South State Street and 625 South Governors Avenue, Dover DE. The Tax Parcel ID is ED-05-077.13-01-52.00-000. Planning Commission: The Planning Commission met on October 20, 2025. The next Planning Commission meeting is scheduled for November 15, 2025. The following applications were considered: • S-23-20 Cold Storage Warehouse at 451 Garrison Oak Drive – The Planning Commission granted approval for a One-Year Extension of the Planning Commission Approval granted November 20, 2023 of the Site Development Plan for a 165,000 SF Warehouse with associated site improvements. The site is located at Lot 8 of the Garrison Oak Business & Technology Park. The property is zoned IPM-2 (Industrial Park Manufacturing Zone – Business and Technology Center) and partially subject to the SWPOZ (Source Water Protection Overlay Zone: Tier 2 Primary Wellhead Protection Area). The property of 11.53 acres is located on the south side Garrison Oak Drive. The owner of record is the City of Dover; and the equitable owner is SLS Equity Partners. Property Address: 451 Garrison Oak Drive. Tax Parcel: LC-05-068.00-02-08.00-000. Council District 3. Waiver Requests Approved: Partial Elimination of Upright Curbing and Reduction of Parking Requirement. Approved: Performance Standards Review Application. The site was granted two variances to reduce setbacks related to building height and to increase the maximum lot coverage to 71% (Board of Adjustment Application V-23-05). • S-23-21 BHD Operations Facility at 250 Garrison Oak Drive – The Planning Commission granted approval for a One-Year Extension of the Planning Commission Approval granted November 20, 2025 of a Site Development Plan for a 6,000 SF Office Building with 4,000 SF Truck Maintenance Garage, parking and storage area for collection trucks and containers, a refueling station, and with associated site improvements. The site is located at Lot 11 of the Garrison Oak Business & Technology Park. The property is zoned IPM-2 (Industrial Park Manufacturing Zone – Business and Technology Center). The property of 10.755 acres is located on the west side of Garrison Oak Drive. The owner of record is Trash Gurls, Inc. Property Address: 250 Garrison Oak Drive. Tax Parcel: LC-05-068.00-02-11.00-000. Council Page 97 District 3. Approved: Performance Standards Review Application. 42

Item #18. • Z-25-01 Lands of Bayhealth Medical Center, Inc. at 600 South State Street: Rezoning RGO/SWPOZ to IO/SWPOZ – The Planning Commission recommended Approval to City Council of a Rezoning application for a parcel of land consisting of 1.0053 acres +/-. The property is zoned RGO (General Residence and Office Zone) and partially subject to the SWPOZ (Source Water Protection Overlay Zone). The proposed zoning for the property is IO (Institutional and Office Zone) and partially subject to the SWPOZ (Source Water Protection Overlay Zone). The property is located at the southwest corner of South State Street and South Street. The owner of record is Bayhealth Medical Center, Inc. Property Address: 600 South State Street. Tax Parcel: ED-05-077.13-01-48.00-000. Council District 2. Ordinance #2025-15. The First Reading of the Proposed Ordinance occurred on September 22, 2025 and Public Hearings is scheduled for d City Council on November 10, 2025. • S-25-12 Blue Hen Corporate Center Pad Sites Master Plan (as Revised) - The Planning Commission granted conditional approval of a Site Development Master Plan application for three parcels of land with frontage on Bay Road consisting of a total of 23.61 acres ±. The properties are zoned SC-2 (Community Shopping Center Zone) and with certain areas subject to the SWPOZ (Source Water Protection Overlay Zone Tier 3 – Excellent Recharge Areas). The proposed project would set the sites for four 8,000 SF buildings (Buildings 1 – 4) and associated 450 parking spaces to be placed on the pad sites located at the Blue Hen Corporate Center. Development is proposed in no specific phase order because it will be built to suit as tenants approach the developer. The property is located on the east side of Bay Road and south of Blue Hen Boulevard. The owners of record is Blue Hen CC, LLC, and Blue Hen Mall, LLC. Property Addresses: 631 Bay Road and 655 Bay Road and another listed as 655 Bay Road (S-10). Tax Parcels: ED- 05-077.00-01-19.08-000, ED-05-077.00-01-19.04-000, and ED-05-077.00-01-19.05-000. Council District 2. Waiver Request Approved by Staff: Partial Elimination of Upright Curbing. • S-25-14 LivSmart Extended Stay Hotel at 530 and 540 Bay Road – The Planning Commission granted conditional approval of Site Development Plan for new 5-story hotel of 113 rooms as a Hilton LivSmart Extended Stay Hotel and with associated parking lot and site improvements. The project will involve the consolidation of two parcels totaling 2.20 acres +/-. The properties are zoned C-4 (Highway Commercial Zone) and are located at the southwest corner of Miller Road and Bay Road with Martin Street to the west. The owners of record are Bay Road Four, LLC and Bay Road Three, LLC and the equitable owner is Weathervane Capital Partners. Property Addresses: 530 Bay Road and 540 Bay Road. Tax Parcels: ED-05- 077.00-01-45.00-000 and ED-05-077.10-01-10.02-000. Council District 2. Waiver Requests Approved: Reduction of Arterial Street Buffer and Elimination of Loading Berth and Reduction of Bicycle Parking Requirement. The most recent application was S-21-05 Bay Road Office Park Master Plan (Revised) granted conditional approval by the Planning Commission in May 2021; it is expired. • S-25-15 7-Eleven with Fuel Pumps at 736 and 738 N. DuPont Highway and 1021 & 1027 N. State Street – The Planning Commission granted conditional approval of Site Development Plan for redevelopment of four parcels (to be consolidated) for a 4,816 SF convenience retail store with fuel pumps under a canopy and associated site improvements. The existing buildings on the properties will be demolished. The properties are located on the east side of North State Street and west of DuPont Highway. The properties are zoned C-4 (Highway Commercial Zone). The owner of record is Harrington Four Seasons, LLC and the equitable owner is Dover DuPont State, LLC. Property Addresses: 736 N. Dupont Highway, 738 N. DuPont Highway, 1021 N. State Street and 1027 N. DuPont Highway. Tax Parcels: ED-05-068.09-01-07.00-000, ED-05-068.09-01-06.00-000, ED-05-068.09-01-04.01-000 and ED-05-068.09-01-04.00-000. Council District 3. Waiver Requests Approved: Reduction of Arterial Street Buffer and Partial Elimination of Upright Curbing. Page 98 43

Item #18. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM CDBG FY25 Projects The Department of Housing and Urban Development approved the 2025-2029 Consolidated Plan and the 2025 Action Plan for the City of Dover. Grant funds have been released to the City and projects are underway. Homeownership Assistance Program CDBG funds will be used to provide homeownership assistance to first-time homebuyers who purchase affordable housing in the City of Dover. Three families have purchased homes. One family is mortgage ready. Central Delaware Housing Collaborative Renovations Costs CDBG funds will be used for interior renovations for a women’s homeless shelter. Central Delaware Housing Collaborative Operations Costs CDBG funds will be used to provide operations costs for a women’s shelter. Milford Housing Homeowner Rehabilitation/Emergency Home Repair Programs CDBG funds will be used to rehabilitate existing owner-occupied housing in the City that are in violation of the City’s Housing Code and complete emergency home repairs to eliminate housing conditions that threaten the health and safety of low-income homeowners. Year-to-date, eight owner occupied homes have been rehabbed, and four (4) homes received emergency home repairs. People’s Community Center Operations Costs CDBG funds will be used to provide operations costs for a homeless shelter for men. People’s Community Center Renovations Costs CDBG funds will be used to renovate an existing portion of the building to a resource and case management center to provide social services to homeless men. Central Delaware Habitat for Humanity CDBG funds will be used for the construction of an affordable housing unit in the Downtown Development District area. American Rescue Act (ARPA) Funding A little over $1.8 million or 87% of funds have been spent on Round 1 of ARPA funding year to date. Dover Housing Authority, Murphey School, Reading Assist, Peoples Church, and House of Hope have completed their projects. ARPA Round 2 funding for a little under $500,000 was awarded to subgrantees in April 2023. Projects are currently underway. Eighty-seven percent (87%) of funds have been drawn down for Round 2 with Murphey School, People’s Community Center, John Wesley AME Church, and NeighborGood Partners completing their projects. The second award to People’s Community Center paid for beds and lockers for the shelter. Page 99 44

Item #18. OCTOBER 2025 YTD YTD YTD MTD FY25 % CASE TYPE MTD FY26 FY25 % No Valid Rental Permit 12 1 1100% 113 190 -41% No Valid Building Permit 3 3 0% 14 12 17% Tall Grass and Weeds 8 7 14% 200 264 -24% Additional Tall Grass 5 5 0% 44 36 22% Annual Housing Inspect 18 18 0% 100 314 -68% Property Maint. Exterior 26 39 -33% 167 301 -45% Electric Termination 0 23 -100% 37 40 -8% Dover Code of Ordinances 46 29 59% 165 136 21% Dangerous Buildings 1 15 -93% 15 74 -80% Zoning 10 6 67% 29 40 -28% 0 Total Cases 234 321 -27% 821 1,805 -55% Total Inspections 672 824 -18% 2,708 3,644 -26% Total Admin Inspections 28 9 211% 57 47 21% Total # of Violations 266 437 -39% 1,164 1,825 -36% Dangerous Buildings, Vacant Buildings, Demolitions  Vacant Buildings currently registered - 120  Dangerous Buildings – 60  Active Rental Dwellings – 7,864 units Page 100 45

Item #18. Building Inspections & Licensing Summary July 2025– July 2024— June Current June 2026 Oct FY’25 2025 PERMITTING AND LICENSING Permits Issued OCT (2025) FYTD 26 OCT (2024) FY25 FYTD 25 FY 26 Administrative Permit 4 13 5 11 Building Addition/Renovation Permits 28 120 31 121 Building Permits 15 71 23 103 Demolition Permits 1 4 2 14 Fence Permits 13 62 14 70 Fire Prevention Permits 10 38 9 32 Mechanical Permits 32 151 43 174 Plumbing Permits 19 148 30 103 Sign Permits 8 39 0 33 Swimming Pool Permits 0 3 4 8 Wireless Communications Facilities 8 11 5 5 Subtotal 660 674 Business Licenses 74 1657 67 1631 Merchant Licenses 27 301 41 308 Contractor Licenses 56 1118 48 1115 Subtotal 3076 3054 Lodging House Licenses 1 2 0 2 Public Occupancy 14 62 12 63 Rental Dwelling 39 95 13 154 Subtotal 159 219 Manufactured Homes 77 305 48 290 BUILDING INSPECTIONS Inspections OCT (2025) FYTD 26 OCT (2024) FY25 FYTD 25 FY 26 Building (Inspections/CBI/Site Meetings) 184 894 161 1160 Plumbing/Mechanical 181 754 219 1431 Certificate of Occupancy 4 36 14 56 Page 101 46

Item #18. Page 102 47

Item #18. Page 103 48

Item #18. Page 104 49

Item #18. Page 105 50

Item #18. CITY OF DOVER DEPARTMENT OF WATER & WASTEWATER MONTHLY REPORT Oct-25 Inflow & Infiltration Costs This chart indicates the amount of money the City is $200,000.00 spending on treating ground and / or rain water through Kent County. This cost is being offset by the Ground Water Inflow Adjustment rate passed on to the customers. April $150,000.00 2025 and July 2025 had a large amout of rainfall, causing a significant I & I deficit. Some months have an inverted cost due to the timing of our report and the timing of the Kent $100,000.00 County Bill. $50,000.00 $- Oct-24 Nov-24 Dec-24 Jan-25 Feb-25 Mar-25 Apr-25 May-25 Jun-25 Jul-25 Aug-25 Sep-25 Oct-25 $(50,000.00) $(100,000.00) I & I Cost Water & Wastewater Repairs 8 Water mains and services are typically repaired at a higher rate when drastic change in temperature 7 occurs. This freeze and thaw cycle expands and contracts the soil, causing cracks in the water line. 6 November 2024 and January 2025 had large fluctuations of temperature, causing a large volume 5 of repairs. 4 3 2 1 0 Oct-24 Nov-24 Dec-24 Jan-25 Feb-25 Mar-25 Apr-25 May-25 Jun-25 Jul-25 Aug-25 Sep-25 Oct-25 Water Mains Repaired Water Services Repaired Wastewater Mains Repaired Wastewater Laterals Repaired Page 106 51

Item #18. CITY OF DOVER DEPARTMENT OF WATER & WASTEWATER MONTHLY REPORT Oct-25 Number of Brown Water Complaints 9 This chart indicates the number of complaints the Department receives. 8 February and March 2025 were high due to flushing being scheduled in April 7 2025. 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Oct-24 Nov-24 Dec-24 Jan-25 Feb-25 Mar-25 Apr-25 May-25 Jun-25 Jul-25 Aug-25 Sep-25 Oct-25 Number of Brown Water Complaints Linear (Number of Brown Water Complaints) Department Spotlight - October The Department of Water & Wastewater provides outreach on "what not to flush". We have created a video to provide information to the public. You would be surprised to see what our team finds in the sewer system, it is a "hairy situation" Page 107 52

Item #19. Page 108

Item #19. Finance Department Monthly Report October 2025 This page intentionally left blank PagePage 2 109

Item #19. Finance Department Monthly Report October 2025 CITY OF DOVER ACTIVITY REPORTS October 2025 FY25 YTD FY26 YTD BANK TRENDS Number of Deposits Made (Hand, ACH & Wire, Lockbox) 2,436 2,333 Total Amount of All Deposits $ 90,921,011 $ 88,138,457 Other Activity Number of Pay Periods 9 9 Number of Direct Deposits Issued 3,582 3,763 Number of Pension Checks Issued 1,241 995 Total Pension Benefits Paid - Defined Benefit Plan $ 2,297,459 $ 2,059,244 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE Number of Check Vouchers 1,928 1,724 Number of EFT Vouchers 1,122 1,065 Vouchers Dollar Amount Disbursed $ 39,309,916 $ 39,572,694 FY25 YTD Wages FY26 YTD Wages $50,392 $167,116 $118,450 $57,999 $25,664 $318,191 $271,278 $266,423 $31,571 $230,421 $776,149 $841,699 $991,723 $1,047,137 $7,557,264 $8,865,413 Regular Regular All over time All over time Vacation Vacation Sick Sick Terminal Leave - Retiree Vacation/Sick Payout Terminal Leave - Retiree Vacation/Sick Payout Personal Personal Comp Time Comp Time Other Other Other includes: pay adjustments, military differential pay, training, committee meetings, worker compensation tracking/adjustments, etc. PagePage 3 110

Item #19. Finance Department Monthly Report October 2025 City of Dover General Fund Summary Fiscal Year to Date October 2025 Revenues Original Budget Actual % Property Taxes $ 17,200,000 $ 17,103,697 99% Transfer Taxes 2,400,000 845,472 35% Program Revenues 10,320,100 5,227,282 51% Utility Transfers 12,000,000 4,000,000 33% Grants 1,821,500 1,657,000 91% Interfund Services 7,938,700 2,243,566 28% All Other 1 1,900,000 499,243 26% $ 53,580,300 $ 31,576,261 59% Expenditures Original Budget Actual % Program Expenses $ 37,803,800 $ 12,500,166 33% Interfund Services 13,654,000 4,379,698 32% Debt Service 625,200 210,278 34% Capital Project Transfers 5,511,200 2,755,600 50% All Other 2 2,147,800 366,225 17% $ 59,742,000 $ 20,211,966 34% 1 Includes Cable Franchise Revenue, Miscellaneous Receipts, Garrison Farm Rent, Sales of Assets, Fund Invest Manager Cost. 2 Includes Bank and CC Fees, Street Lights Expense, DDP Contribution, Trf to Cable Franchise Reserve, Trf to Electric I & E, and Trf to Electric Revenue Fund, Trf to Uncollectible Reserve and Misc. Grant Expense and Trf to Economic Development Reserve Fund. PagePage 4 111

Item #19. Finance Department Monthly Report October 2025 General Fund Revenues $20,000,000 $18,000,000 $16,000,000 $14,000,000 $12,000,000 $10,000,000 $8,000,000 $6,000,000 $4,000,000 $2,000,000 $- Property Taxes Transfer Taxes Program Revenues Utility Transfers Grants Interfund Services All Other 1 Original Budget Actual General Fund Expenditures $40,000,000 $35,000,000 $30,000,000 $25,000,000 $20,000,000 $15,000,000 $10,000,000 $5,000,000 $- Program Expenses Interfund Services Debt Service Capital Project Transfers All Other 2 Original Budget Actual PagePage 5 112

Item #19. Finance Department Monthly Report October 2025 City of Dover Water Fund Summary Fiscal Year to Date October 2025 Revenues Original Budget Actual % Customer Sales $ 7,568,500 $ 2,634,222 35% Impact Fees 250,000 257,546 103% Rents 464,000 478,686 103% Miscellaneous 1 215,400 440,259 196% $ 8,497,900 $ 3,810,714 45% Expenditures Original Budget Actual % Program Expenses $ 4,469,100 $ 1,381,986 31% Interfund Services 750,900 405,067 54% Debt Service 543,000 153,035 28% Capital Project Transfers 1,280,600 640,300 50% Electric I&E Fund Transfer 25,000 - 0% General Fund Transfer 1,000,000 333,333 33% All Other 2 30,000 7,604 25% $ 8,098,600 $ 2,921,325 36% 1 Includes Penalties, Income from Sale of Assets, Miscellaneous Income, and Reconnect Fees. 2 Includes Bank & CC Fees. PagePage 6 113

Item #19. Finance Department Monthly Report October 2025 Water Revenues $8,000,000 $7,000,000 $6,000,000 $5,000,000 $4,000,000 $3,000,000 $2,000,000 $1,000,000 $- Customer Sales Impact Fees Rents Miscellaneous 1 Original Budget Actual Water Expenditures $5,000,000 $4,500,000 $4,000,000 $3,500,000 $3,000,000 $2,500,000 $2,000,000 $1,500,000 $1,000,000 $500,000 $- Program Expenses Interfund Services Debt Service Capital Project Transfers Electric I&E Fund Transfer General Fund Transfer All Other 2 Original Budget Actual Page 7 Page 114

Item #19. Finance Department Monthly Report October 2025 City of Dover Wastewater Fund Summary Fiscal Year to Date October 2025 Revenues Original Budget Actual % Customer Sales $ 12,276,500 $ 3,207,997 26% Impact Fees 235,000 198,951 85% Miscellaneous 1 200,200 94,652 47% $ 12,711,700 $ 3,501,600 28% Expenditures Original Budget Actual % Program Expenses $ 2,044,300 $ 626,991 31% Kent County Treatment Fee 5,822,500 1,564,788 27% Interfund Services 935,200 304,798 33% Debt Service 644,000 82,672 13% Capital Project Transfers 2,694,900 1,347,450 50% Electric I&E Transfer 25,000 - 0% General Fund Transfer 1,000,000 333,333 33% All Other 2 11,000 2,662 24% $ 13,176,900 $ 4,262,695 32% 1 Includes Interest Income, Penalties, Loss on Disposal, and Miscellaneous Income. 2 Includes Bank & CC Fees. PagePage 8 115

Item #19. Finance Department Monthly Report October 2025 Wastewater Revenues $14,000,000 $12,000,000 $10,000,000 $8,000,000 $6,000,000 $4,000,000 $2,000,000 $- Customer Sales Impact Fees Miscellaneous 1 Original Budget Actual Wastewater Expenditures $7,000,000 $6,000,000 $5,000,000 $4,000,000 $3,000,000 $2,000,000 $1,000,000 $- Program Expenses Kent County Treatment Interfund Services Debt Service Capital Project Electric I&E Transfer General Fund Transfer All Other 2 Fee Transfers Original Budget Actual Page 9 Page 116

Item #19. Finance Department Monthly Report October 2025 City of Dover Electric Fund Summary Fiscal Year to Date October 2025 Revenues Original Budget Actual % Customer Sales $ 103,145,400 $ 35,470,469 34% All Other 1 3,045,000 1,451,114 48% $ 106,190,400 $ 36,921,583 35% Expenditures Original Budget Actual % Power Supply & Generation $ 82,354,500 $ 24,333,000 30% Electric Operating Div. Exp. 11,276,300 3,556,802 32% Interfund Services 5,123,800 1,533,701 30% Debt Service 1,376,300 468,817 34% Capital Project Transfers 10,538,300 5,269,150 0% General Fund Transfer 10,000,000 3,333,333 33% All Other 2 2,503,500 763,299 30% $ 123,172,700 $ 39,258,102 32% 1 Includes Rental Revenue, Miscellaneous Service Revenue, Interest Earnings, Investment Management Fee New Service Fees, Sale of Assets, Trf from Uncollectible Reserves, General Service Billing, Revenue from Stabilization, Penalties, Green Energy Charges, and Delay Damages. 2 Includes Utility Tax, Interest on Deposits, Bank & CC Fees, Bond Issuance Costs, Transfer to Uncollectible Reserve, and Green Energy. Megawatt Hours Sold & Purchased Rev. Budget Actual Sales to Customers MWh (excl. Street Light MWh) 764,148 267,544 Sales per MWh $133.22 $130.45 Purchased/Generated MWh 770,241- 269,046- All In MWh Supply & Generation $106.86 $90.44 Page Page 10 117

Item #19. Finance Department Monthly Report October 2025 Electric Fund - Revenues Millions $- $10 $20 $30 $40 $50 $60 $70 $80 $90 $100 $110 $120 Original Budget Actual Customer Sales All Other 1 Electric Fund - Expenditures $90,000,000 $85,000,000 $80,000,000 $75,000,000 $70,000,000 $65,000,000 $60,000,000 $55,000,000 $50,000,000 $45,000,000 $40,000,000 $35,000,000 $30,000,000 $25,000,000 $20,000,000 $15,000,000 $10,000,000 $5,000,000 $- Power Supply & Electric Operating Capital Project General Fund Interfund Services Debt Service All Other 2 Generation Div. Exp. Transfers Transfer Original Budget $82,354,500 11,276,300 5,123,800 1,376,300 10,538,300 10,000,000 2,503,500 Actual $24,333,000 3,556,802 1,533,701 468,817 5,269,150 3,333,333 763,299 Original Budget Actual Page Page 11 118

Item #19. Finance Department Monthly Report October 2025 City of Dover Division Expense Summary (General Fund) Fiscal Year to Date October 2025 Original Budget Actual % General Fund Divisions % of Budget City Clerk $ 492,900 $ 141,018 29% Council 276,600 87,931 32% Mayor Fire 1,133,800 451,207 40% Human Resources Grounds 2,047,300 756,549 37% Customer Services Library 2,378,800 821,311 35% Fleet Maintenance Recreation 1,653,300 574,329 35% Procurement & Inventory Life Safety 1,664,100 326,624 20% Code Enforcement 1,143,700 209,910 18% Engineering Planning 1,079,800 239,574 22% Facilities Management Public Inspections 769,100 171,240 22% Pub. Services Administration Police 24,762,300 8,152,480 33% Finance Police Extra Duty 910,700 426,705 47% Information Technology Streets 899,800 266,066 29% Sanitation - 506,688 0% City Manager Stormwater 1,104,900 269,067 24% Stormwater City Manager 1,485,300 602,600 41% Sanitation Information Technology 1,045,700 321,341 31% Streets Finance 1,039,800 315,816 31% Police Extra Duty Pub. Services Administration 743,500 260,923 35% Facilities Management 807,900 205,833 25% Police Engineering 303,500 84,964 28% Public Inspections Procurement & Inventory 1,012,700 338,809 33% Planning Fleet Maintenance 1,139,800 353,936 31% Code Enforcement Customer Services 1,515,900 512,273 34% Life Safety Human Resources 529,900 122,702 23% Recreation Mayor 316,700 95,673 30% $ 50,257,800 $ 16,615,569 33% Library Grounds Fire Council City Clerk 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50% Page Page 12 119

Finance Department Monthly Report October 2025 Item #19. City of Dover Utilities Expenditure Summary Fiscal Year to Date October 2025 Water Divison Original Budget Actual % Engineering & Inspection $ 416,600 $ 136,098 33% Water Department 971,000 307,005 32% Water Treatment Plant 3,081,500 938,882 30% $ 4,469,100 $ 1,381,986 31% Wastewater Divison Original Budget Actual % Engineering & Inspection $ 519,900 $ 122,207 24% Wastewater Department 1,524,400 504,784 33% $ 2,044,300 $ 626,991 31% Electric Division Original Budget Actual % Transmission/Distribution $ 5,743,600 $ 1,887,572 33% Electrical Engineering 2,052,000 665,385 32% Administration 1,751,900 430,472 25% Meter Reading 569,400 182,637 32% Systems Operations 1,159,400 390,736 34% $ 11,276,300 $ 3,556,802 32% Page 120 Page 13

Finance Department Monthly Report October 2025 Item #19. Water Division % of Budget Water Treatment Plant Water Department Engineering & Inspection 29% 30% 30% 31% 31% 32% 32% 33% 33% Wastewater Division % of Budget Wastewater Department Engineering & Inspection 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% Electric Division % of Budget Systems Operations Meter Reading Administration Electrical Engineering Transmission/Distribution 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% Page 121 Page 14

Finance Department Monthly Report October 2025 Item #19. City of Dover Capital Outlay Summary (All Funds) Fiscal Year to Date October 2025 General Fund Original Budget Actual % Fire $ 569,500 $ 158,646 28% Code Enforcement 135,000 - 0% Police 1,176,400 746,101 48% Streets 2,870,000 526,980 14% Sanitation - 670,994 0% Stormwater 3,124,000 44,782 1% Grounds 85,000 79,154 97% Recreation 330,000 226,665 12% Purchasing 517,000 58,350 5% Information Technology 110,700 31,416 12% Facilities Management 474,000 2,153 0% Fleet Maintenance 44,100 28,513 0% General Fund Capital Projects $ 9,435,700 $ 2,573,755 16% Water Fund Water $ 3,098,600 $ 791,847 8% Water Treatment Plant 5,682,000 12,717 0% Water Fund Capital Projects $ 8,780,600 $ 804,564 5% Wastewater Fund Wastewater $ 2,702,100 $ 690,413 14% Wastewater Fund Capital Projects $ 2,702,100 $ 690,413 14% Electric Fund Electric Generation $ 460,000 $ 102,584 13% Transmission/Distribution 2,400,000 228,885 6% Electrical Engineering 5,964,000 973,557 10% Metering 50,800 - 0% ERP System 1,803,500 30,250 2% Electric Administration 60,000 - 0% Electric Fund Capital Projects $ 10,738,300 $ 1,335,276 8% TOTAL CAPITAL PROJECTS $ 31,656,700 $ 5,404,008 10% Page 122 Page 15

Finance Department Monthly Report October 2025 Item #19. Capital Outlay - All Divisions $7,000,000 $6,000,000 $5,000,000 $4,000,000 $3,000,000 $2,000,000 $1,000,000 $- Original Budget Actual Capital Outlay - By Fund $12,000,000 $10,738,300 $10,000,000 $9,435,700 $8,780,600 $8,000,000 $6,000,000 $4,000,000 $2,702,100 $2,573,755 $2,000,000 $1,335,276 $804,564 $690,413 $- Original Budget Actual General Fund Capital Projects Water Fund Capital Projects Wastewater Fund Electric Fund Capital Projects Page 123 Page 16

Item #20. DOVER FIRE DEPARTMENT October 2025 FIRE CHIEFS REPORT Page 124

Item #20. To: Mayor and City Council From: David Carey, Fire Chief Date: October 11, 2025 Subject: October 2025 Fire Chief’s Report Department Activities – October 2025 Events Several Officers and Firefighters conducted Fire Prevention Week visits at local schools. This year’s national theme, “Charge into Fire Safety™: Lithium-Ion Batteries in Your Home,” works to educate everyone about using these batteries safely. The campaign stresses how important it is to BUY, CHARGE, and RECYCLE safely when it comes to lithium-ion batteries. Firefighters also emphasized the importance of home fire escape planning, working smoke alarms, and involving the whole family in safety drills. Our members also assisted with Trunk or Treat events throughout the city, helping to promote community engagement and fire safety awareness in a fun, family-oriented setting. Acknowledgements We would like to take this opportunity to congratulate Paul Eichler on his retirement from the Anne Arundel County Fire Department, where he served as Battalion Chief with 34 years of dedicated service. Chief Eichler has been instrumental in the fire service through his career work, his role as an instructor at the Delaware State Fire School (DSFS), his service as a Life Member of the Dover Fire Department, and as a vocal leader of the Delaware Sprinkler Foundation. We wish him a happy, relaxing, and well-deserved retirement and look forward to seeing him around the station. We also extend congratulations to Collin Chesley on his employment with the Dover Police Department. Collin has been a member of the Dover Fire Department since he was 13 years old and participated in our Live-In Program for the past four years. We wish him the best of luck in his new career with the Dover Police Department. New Driver Qualifications  Kevin O’Toole – Engines, Squads, and Ladder 1  Drew Kuntzi – Tower 2  Zack Lawerance – Engine 2, Squad 2 Page 125

Item #20. Major Incidents – September 2025  Motor Vehicle Accident with Entrapment – South Dupont and Webbs Lane  Motor Vehicle Accident with Entrapment – 1847 South Dupont Highway  Motor Vehicle Accident with Entrapment – 988 Forrest Street  Building Fire – 4 Hanson Way  House Fire – South Taylor Avenue Stipend and Live-In Program Updates Live-In Program We currently have seven live-in firefighters: three at Station 1 and four at Station 2. 2025 Stipend Program – Totals to Date The Stipend Program continues to perform strongly. In October, 47 firefighters participated. We are actively collecting feedback, identifying areas for improvement, and making necessary adjustments. Month Total ($) Members June $19,106.00 41 July $21,188.10 41 August $25,607.00 46 September $25,915.80 47 October $27,600.00 47 Total Expenditure to Date: $119,416.90 Personnel Activities Category Hours Meetings 105.45 Training 92.00 Duty Crews 6,187.50 Incident 3,808.00 Total Hours 10,192.95 Page 126

Item #20. Total Calls for the month of October: 160 Average Attendance: 23.8 personnel per call If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Respectfully submitted, David Carey Fire Chief Page 127

Item #20. Page 128

Item #20. Page 129

Item #21. Page 130

CITY OF DOVER DEPARTMENT OF POLICE Item #21. 400 SOUTH QUEEN STREET DOVER, DELAWARE 19904 302-736-7111 Chief of Police Police Captains THOMAS A. JOHNSON, JR. RANDY R. ROBBINS Deputy Chief of Police ROBERT E. ROSWELL PAUL D. KUNTZI KEVIN A. STREADWICK December 8, 2025 Honorable Robin Christiansen, Mayor Members of Dover City Council City Hall Dover, DE 19901 Mayor Christiansen and Council Members: The following is the monthly report of Dover Police Department activities for October: COMPLAINTS/EVENTS YTD Totals compiled through October numbered 39,502 This represents a decrease of 1,308 from the 40,810 reported over the same period in 2024. 50,000 40,810 39,502 40,000 33,129 33,791 35,924 30,000 20,000 10,000 0 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIONS Burglary: 5 cases reported, 2 cases cleared and 0 cases were cleared from previous months. Robbery: 2 cases reported, 2 cases cleared and 0 cases was cleared from previous months. Sex Assault: 2 cases reported, 2 cases cleared and 1 case was cleared from previous months. Homicide: 0 cases reported, 0 cases cleared and 0 cases cleared from previous months. There were 6 Non-Criminal Death Investigations, 6 cases cleared and 0 cases cleared from previous months. 1 Page 131

DRUG, VICE, & ORGANIZED CRIME / STREET CRIMES UNIT ENFORCEMENT Item #21. Marijuana: 10,412 grams seized Cocaine: 9,000 grams seized Ecstasy: 0 doses seized Prescription Pills: 0 doses seized Heroin: 0 grams seized Methamphetamine: 476 grams seized Fentanyl: 59.79 grams seized Other Rx Drugs: 0 grams/doses seized Drug Proceeds: $16,692 seized FIREARM SEIZURES/INSIDE CITY LIMITS 15 10 4 4 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CI DVOC/STREET CRIMES PATROL SEU HANDGUN RIFLE SHOTGUN Firearms: 8 Handguns, 1 Shotgun TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENT YTD Citation Totals compiled through October numbered 6,744. This represents an increase of 2,406 from the 4,338 reported over the same period in 2024. 8,000 6,744 7,000 6,357 5,969 6,000 4,907 5,000 4,338 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 TRAFFIC CRASHES: YTD = 1.649 2 Page 132

911 CENTER ACTIVITY Item #21. Total compiled during October numbered 8,161 calls. This represents a decrease of 111 from the 8,272 reported during the same period in 2024. 8,400 8,272 8,200 8,161 8,044 8,000 7,800 7,639 7,600 7,453 7,400 7,200 7,000 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 CITY ORDINANCE SUMMONS YTD Totals compiled through October numbered 3,841. This represents an increase of 1,295 from the 2,546 reported over the same period in 2024. 5,000 3,841 4,000 3,532 3,278 3,000 2,546 1,791 1,655 2,000 833 914 1,041 678 1,000 0 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 ISSUED 3,532 3,278 1,791 2,546 3,841 PAID 833 678 914 1,041 1,655 3 Page 133

COMMUNITY POLICING Item #21. This proactive unit takes the lead on community engagement and supporting our community organizations. They have administrative responsibilities and also support other departmental units, such as patrol, during times of high work volumes or special operations with enforcement activities. In addition to those duties, the unit accomplished the following in October:  Assisted Patrol Units during major incidents, high 911 call volume and/or low staffing  Liaison with Dover Housing Authority regarding Manchester Square crime data  Coffee with a Cop event at the Dover Target store  Conducted FEDEX property security assessment  Participated in the Faith & Blue weekend – Church Softball League  Supported the Homecoming Parade/Football game – Dover High School  Assisted motors with a Funeral Escort  Visits to South Dover, Reily Brown elementary schools [K-9 Roy]  Attended Canine Companions recertification [K-9 Roy]  Visited the Silver Lake Nursing Home [K-9 Roy]  21st Century Program activities at the Central Middle School [PAL]  Follow-up w/juvenile issue in the Woodmill section  Participated in a Downtown Groundbreaking attended by Gov. Meyer  Property checks in Cannon Mills related to building codes issue  Continued to obtain authorization to enforce trespassing from various properties  Continued efforts regarding trespassing complaint on South Governors: 1 arrest  Continued efforts regarding trespassing complaint on South DuPont Hwy: 1 arrest  Participated in the Citizen’s Police Academy with Crisis Negotiations Presentation  Follow-up on a traffic matter connected to the Town Pointe neighborhood  Participated in the Dover sponsored Trunk or Treat event [K-9 Roy]  Participated in the Dover High School & United Church Trunk or Treat events [PAL]  Conducted property checks of problem areas from community complaints: Old Post Office, Reed Street, 100-400 blocks of S. State Street, & Town Pointe Apts.  Participated in a meeting at the Dover Library related to homelessness  Participated in Social Learning Night – South Dover Elementary – [PAL]  Participated in various activities related to the Delaware State University Homecoming  Located an occupied Stolen Vehicle: 1 arrested  Planning for Veteran’s Day display, Trunk or Treat, Easter event, Hometown Holiday, Operation Gobble, Sponsored Athlete Program [PAL]  Training Events: Collision Reconstruction, Crisis Negotiations, VirTra simulator, SORT, Certified Instructor, NCIC re-certifications, & Sniper  The Behavioral Health Unit (BHU) responded to and/or assisted with 74 notable Calls for Service (CFS). Of those 74 CFS, the following occurred: o 20 involved transports to Correctional Facilities, the Dover Police Department, Medical/Mental Health Facilities, Courthouses, and a Veteran’s Affairs Clinic. o 32 involved Mental Health contacts and 11 involved Substance Abuse contacts, while 4 CFS involved a combination of both. o 51 involved other circumstances and/or CFS types. o 83 direct field contacts occurred during the 74 complaints involving Mental Health, Substance Abuse, and/or Other Circumstances. 4 Page 134

 BHU Meetings/Events/Community Engagement/Projects/Training: Item #21. o Most Notable: CPL Shepherd and Clinician Heath attended the Inspiring Hope Conference at Bally’s Hotel and Casino. The BHU Team was also invited by the National Alliance on Mental Illness (NAMI) to speak on the Crisis Intervention Team (CIT) panel during the conference. o The BHU assisted with a low level barricade complaint on E Division St where a subject in an extremely altered mental state locked himself in an interior bathroom and refused to exit. The BHU and other Patrol Officers attempted negotiations with negative results, and eventually made non-forcible entry into the bathroom. The male subject was detained without incident and transported to Bayhealth Kent Campus for assessment and treatment. Clinician Heath also provided resources for the family in reference to this case. o The BHU attended Mental Health Court through Kent County Superior Court and met with Judicial Staff in reference to their current case load prior to observing the Court proceedings. o The BHU attended and presented at the City of Dover Council Meeting in reference to the Quality of Life Initiative. o CPL Shepherd met with representatives from Coalition for a Safer Delaware that focuses on improving firearm safety and legislation within Delaware, with a focus on Lethal Violence Protective Orders (LVPO), Weapon Relinquishment Orders (WRO), Protection from Abuse Orders (PFA), No Contact Orders (NCO), and Sexual Violence Protection Orders (SVPO). o The BHU continues to meet with different State, Local, and Private Entities to improve access to effective care in the City of Dover and improve Crisis Response throughout the State. o BHU continued to assist all Units within the Department with Behavioral Health PROGRAMS AND INITIATIVES With the Mayor’s endorsement, the Dover PD was an active participant in the effort to pass House Bill 123 during the 2025 legislative session. The Bill was a direct response to a loophole in the law that allowed certain offenders to escape meaningful accountability when they discharge firearms into potentially occupied structures. Dover has been the scene of many such events and joined forces with other communities in our sister counties to rally the Legislature to act. We thank Representative Harris for her leadership and liaison during this process that culminated in a signing ceremony on Leg Mall on the 8th of October. The Chief interviewed and offered a position to a lateral entry police candidate who had begun his career in the DSUPD. Officer Steven Payne is a graduate of the Dover Academy and is expected to be on the team by the end of November. The second testing cycle only produced one qualified candidate Ms. Dominique Jones was offered a position as a Recruit Officer. She will join the January session of the Police Academy. The Chief and Deputy Chief attended the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP) annual conference from October 16-22, 2025 in Denver, Colorado. The two executive officers attended seminars, networking events, and assessed the available services and technologies related to the profession. 5 Page 135

The DPD Trunk or Treat event on Leg Mall returned in 2025 on October 25th. While Item #21. noted in the CPU section, the event is worth repeating as it was well planned, delivered, and attended. Congratulations to Cpl. Ragona and her team for the great success. There was another GVI Call-in for violent offenders who are connected to the Dover community. On October 29, 2025, approximately 20 high-risk individuals were brought to a neutral site for an hour long presentation. Working with our GVI partners, the offenders were offered a way out of the lifestyle that leads to violence but also reminded of the consequences for continued behavior, particularly related to firearms. Quite a number of them accepted services. We will continue this multi-pronged approach to address shootings that might occur in Dover for as long as the program can be sustained. Please visit our website at www.doverpolice.org for up to date information on crimes and activities in the City of Dover. Respectfully Submitted, Thomas A. Johnson, Jr. Chief of Police 6 Page 136

ACTION FORM Item #22. PROCEEDING: City Council DEPARTMENT OF ORIGIN: Information Technology PREPARED BY: Joseph Simmons, Director, Information Technology SUBJECT: City of Dover Technology Infrastructure Modernization Project REFERENCE: RELATED PROJECT: REVIEWED BY: David S. Hugg, III, City Manager and Patricia M. Marney, Controller / Treasurer EXHIBITS: Infrastructure Modernization Project Presentation EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $295,000 AMOUNT BUDGETED: $295,000 FUNDING SOURCE (Dept./Page in CIP & Budget): Approved SLCGP Grant Funds/IT Budget TIMETABLE: Completion in 2027 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends City Council approve sole source procurement of SAN/Server/Network hardware and services for the Infrastructure Modernization Project IT2610 & IT2613 to improve reliability and enhance cybersecurity protection of the City of Dover’s network infrastructure not to exceed $295,000 using the awarded Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) SLGCP grant funds and IT Server Project IT2404. BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS The City of Dover Infrastructure Modernization Project plan was presented to the Legislative and Finance Committee on October 28, 2025. This project aims to enhance the City’s IT infrastructure by improving system redundancy, performance, and resilience to support our growing data, application, and service demands and position us for future emerging technology such as AI. The modernization aligns with the City’s digital transformation goals and cybersecurity framework by improving data protection, system efficiency, and disaster recovery capabilities. The proposed solution will upgrade our primary data center with high-performance, flash array clustered servers and a virtualized SAN environment and include a redundant DR Site with mirrored storage and replication technology at a secondary secure, centralized location to ensure rapid recovery and business continuity. This project will primarily be funded with the awarded Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) SLGCP grant funds made available to improve the cybersecurity posture of municipalities, counties, and state agencies. Page 137

Item #23. PETITION TO ANNEX AND REZONE PROPERTY First Reading Before the Dover City Council December 8, 2025 File Number: AX-26-01 Ordinance Number: 2025-23 Applicant/ Owner of Lupe N. Fuller Record: Property Address: 7 Nixon Lane, Dover DE Tax Parcel ID #: ED-00-068.19-01-28.00-000 Lot Size: 0.9533 acres +/- (41,526 SF) Present Zoning: RS-1 (Residential Single Family Zone) Proposed Zoning: R-8 (One Family Residence Zone) 2019 Comprehensive Category 1: High Priority Annexation Areas Plan Designation: 2019 Comprehensive Residential Medium Density Plan Land Use Category: Present Use: Single Family Detached Dwelling Proposed Use: Single Family Detached Dwelling and potential future subdivision of vacant area into multiple lots Annexation Request/Rezoning Application For Referral to the Council Committee of the Whole: Utility Committee on January 27, 2026 and for Public Hearing/Recommendation at the Planning Commission on February 17, 2026 and for Public Hearing/Final Action at City Council on March 9, 2026. Page 138

Item #23. Page 139

Item #23. Page 140

Item #23. FIRST READING City of Dover PROPOSED ORDINANCE #2025-23 1 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND ZONING MAP OF 2 THE CITY OF DOVER CHANGING THE ZONING DESIGNATION OF PROPERTY 3 LOCATED AT 7 NIXON LANE 4 5 WHEREAS, the City of Dover has enacted a zoning ordinance regulating the use of property 6 within the limits of the City of Dover; and 7 8 WHEREAS, it is deemed in the best interest of zoning and planning to change the permitted 9 use of property below from RS-1 (Residential Single Family Zone) to R-8 (One Family 10 Residence Zone). 11 12 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE 13 CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: 14 15 1. That from and after the passage and approval of this ordinance the Zoning Map and Zoning 16 Ordinance of the City of Dover have been amended by changing the zoning designation 17 from RS-1 (Residential Single Family Zone) to R-8 (One Family Residence Zone) on that 18 property located at 7 Nixon Lane (on the east side of Nixon Lane to slightly north of North 19 Little Creek Road), consisting of 41,526+/- S.F.(0.9533 acres+/- ), owned by Lupe N. Fuller. 20 21 (Tax Parcel: ED-00-068.19-01-28.00-000; Planning Reference: AX-26-01; Third Council 22 District) 23 24 ADOPTED: * 25 26 Action History 27 12/08/2025 – Scheduled for First Reading – City Council Page 141

Item #24. PETITION TO ANNEX AND REZONE PROPERTIES First Reading Before the Dover City Council December 8, 2025 File Number: AX-26-02 Ordinance Number: 2025-24 Applicant/ Owner of United Worldwide Express, LLC Record: Property Address: 1624 North Little Creek Road, Dover DE Tax Parcel ID #: ED-00-068.20-01-15.00-000 Lot Size: 5.12 acres +/- Present Zoning: IL (Limited Industrial Zone) RMH (Residential Manufactured Home Zone) Property Address: Unaddressed Parcel south of North Little Creek Road Tax Parcel ID #: ED-00-077.00-01-07.00-000 Lot Size: 3.15 acres +/- Present Zoning: RMH (Residential Manufactured Home Zone) Property Address: Unaddressed Parcel west of State Route 1 Tax Parcel ID #: ED-00-077.00-01-07.01-000 Lot Size: 0.48 acres +/- Present Zoning: RMH (Residential Manufactured Home Zone) Proposed Zoning: IPM (Industrial Park Manufacturing Zone) AEOZ (Airport Environs Overlay Zone): APZII – Accident Potential Zone II 2019 Comprehensive Office and Office Park Plan Land Use Category: Present Use: Storage/Warehouse Buildings and Vacant Lots Proposed Use: Future Redevelopment (for Mini-Storage Buildings) Annexation Request/Rezoning Application For Referral to the Council Committee of the Whole: Utility Committee on January 27, 2026 and for Public Hearing/Recommendation at the Planning Commission on February 17, 2026 and for Public Hearing/Final Action at City Council on March 9, 2026. Page 142

Item #24. Page 143

1 OU T E # LEXINGTON GLEN H.O.A. NIC HO 5-05-068.20-01-56.00-000 LAS DR (OFF RA ZONED R-8 IVE N.O.F. MP) NORT H LIT STATE OF DELWARE TLE CR STATE R EEK RO AD STATE ROUTE 1 X LAN E FAIRFA NORT STA TE ROUTE AY H LITTL / EXPRESSW STATE (FREEWAY (DELA E CRE W A RE EK RO #1 AD E #1 ROUT T H BO (80' W IDE E #8) R OU T ) (NOR 22'± 702'± TO NICHOLAS (SO DRIVE E #1 C8 C1 318'± TO FAIRFAX LANE ROUTD) STATEUTHBOUND) C2 UN NE C3 ESS, LLC X LA (60' W IDE 01-62.00-000 FAIRF W IDE EXPR A 0.52± AC. L15 CURRENT ZONING: CP 2-05-068.20- L16 UNITED W OR PROPOSED O UNITED W O ZONING: IP LD RLW IDE EX M PRESS, LL LOCATION MAP SCALE: 1"=1000' 2-05-068.20- C 01-61.00-000 (FREEW L14 L18 1 L17 KEY INDEX OUTE #AY) 477.8'± 1.77 ± AC. STATE R (W IDTH AY ANNEXATION SEPTIC C UR RE N T ZONING: C VARIES S SW PROPOSED PO / E XPRE C4 WETLANDS ZONING: IP L19 ) M C7 L22 1 L2 L2 L20 113'± 50.9'± 3 LINE BEARING DISTANCE N.O.F. L1 S 86°43'12" W 20.00' STATE OF DELWARE L2 S 00°49'32" E 71.97' STATE ROUTE 1 L3 S 00°49'32" E 82.66' UNITED WORLWIDE EXPRESS, LLC L4 S 88°07'03" W 115.00' L5 S 02°34'03" E 404.14' L13 2-00-068.20-01-15.00-000 L1 L6 S 87°45'58" E 125.01' 5.12± AC. CURRENT ZONING: IL L7 N 50°03'24" W 302.67' 98'± L8 N 85°02'34" W 241.97' PROPOSED ZONING: IPM L2 L9 N 50°03'24" W 31.95' L10 N 19°38'41" W 502.78' IL ZONE L12 ZONING DISTRICT BOU NDARY LINE L11 S 31°50'26" W 33.84' RMH ZONE L12 S 85°49'01" W 392.38' L1 L3 L13 N 19°38'41" W 308.86' 1 L14 N 08°45'20" E 343.64' L4 L15 N 05°37'04" E 236.18' UNITED WORLWIDE EXPRESS, LLC L16 N 05°37'26" E 236.42' 2-00-077.00-01-07.00-000 L17 S 82°22'34" E 65.00' 3.15± AC. L18 S 82°22'56" E 30.20' CURRENT ZONING: RMH L19 N 05°37'26" E 245.00' Y PROPOSED ZONING: IPM ER WA L20 N 88°55'26" E 144.00' L21 N 36°19'34" W 79.07' RUBAK IDE L22 N 27°55'12" E 51.19' L23 N 31°59'09" E 43.40' (60' W N.O.F. L10 L5 CURVE RADIUS ARC LENGTH CHORD LENGTH CHORD BEARING A SUBDIVISION KNOWN AS C1 2894.90' 124.90' 124.89' S 80°20'42" E "ROJAN MEADOWS" C2 2894.90' 95.25' 95.25' S 82°31'25" E AS RECORDED IN PLAT C3 2894.90' 102.82' 102.82' S 84°29'01" E BOOK 153, PAGE 34 C4 5884.23' 648.59' 648.26' N 07°02'05" W ZONED RM-1/PND, C5 21539.48' 77.09' 77.09' S 02°52'48" W AEOZ-APZII C6 21539.48' 173.65' 173.65' N 02°58'30" E C7 361.01' 94.46' 94.19' N 16°21'32" E C8 25.00' 14.26' 14.07' S 25°05'47" W L6 L9 UNITED WORLDWIDE EXPRESS C5 L8 2-00-077.00-01-07.01-000 0.48± AC. CURRENT ZONING: RMH PROPOSED ZONING: IPM L7 C6 AD RO A N IDE J 'W RO (60 NOTES CURRENT OWNER OF RECORD: UNITED WORLDWIDE EXPRESS. LLC 605 INTERCHANGE BOULEVARD ANNEXATION PLAN NEWARK, DE 19711 OF ENGINEER: SCOTT ENGINEERING, INC. UNITED WORLDWIDE EXPRESS, LLC 22 OLD RUDNICK LANE DOVER, DE 19901 NORTH LITTLE CREEK ROAD 1. TAX MAP PARCEL NO. 2-00-068.20-01-15.00-000 ZONED IL (5.12± AC.) DOVER, DE 2-00-077.00-01-07.00-000 ZONED RMH (3.15± AC.) 2-00-077.00-01-07.01-000 ZONED RMH (0.48± AC.) 2. PROPOSED ZONING: IPM (INDUSTRIAL PARK MANUFACTURING) SITUATE IN: EAST DOVER HUNDRED 3. EXISTING USE: STORAGE AND WAREHOUSE KENT COUNTY, STATE OF DELAWARE 4. PROPOSED USE: MINI STORAGE 5. SETBACKS: EXISTING IL - FRONT 40'; SIDE 25'; REAR 40' SCOTt ENGINEERING, INC. RMH - FRONT 20'; SIDE 5'; REAR 10' Consulting Engineers Surveyors Land Planners PROPOSED IPM - FRONT 60', SIDE & REAR 40' (100' ADJOINING RESIDENTIAL ZONE) 22 Old Rudnick Lane, Suite 2 Dover, DE 19901 302-736-3058 DRAWING NO. 3220 SCALE: 1"=150' DRAWN BY. S.E.I. ANNEX-1

FIRST READING City of Dover PROPOSED ORDINANCE #2025-24 1 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND ZONING MAP OF 2 THE CITY OF DOVER CHANGING THE ZONING DESIGNATION OF PROPERTY 3 LOCATED AT 1624 N. LITTLE CREEK ROAD AND TWO ADJACENT PARCELS 4 5 WHEREAS, the City of Dover has enacted a zoning ordinance regulating the use of property 6 within the limits of the City of Dover; and 7 8 WHEREAS, it is deemed in the best interest of zoning and planning to change the permitted 9 use of the main property below from IL (Limited Industrial Zone) and RMH (Residential 10 Manufactured Home Zone) and the other two parcels from RMH (Residential Manufactured 11 Home Zone) to IPM (Industrial Park Manufacturing Zone) and subject to the AEOZ (Airport 12 Environs Overlay Zone): APZ II – Accident Potential Zone II. 13 14 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE 15 CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: 16 17 1. That from and after the passage and approval of this ordinance the Zoning Map and Zoning 18 Ordinance of the City of Dover have been amended by changing the zoning designation of 19 the main property from IL (Limited Industrial Zone) and RMH (Residential Manufactured 20 Home Zone) and the other two parcels from RMH (Residential Manufactured Home Zone) 21 to IPM (Industrial Park Manufacturing Zone) subject to the AEOZ (Airport Environs 22 Overlay Zone): APZ II – Accident Potential Zone II on that property located at 1624 N. 23 Little Creek Road and two adjacent parcels (on the south side of North Little Creek Road 24 and adjacent to State Route 1), consisting of 5.12+/- Acres, 3.15+/- Acres, and 0.48+/- Acres 25 owned by United Worldwide Express, LLC. 26 27 (Tax Parcel: ED-00-068.20-01-15.00-000, ED-00-077.00-01-07.00-000, and ED-00-077.00- 28 01-07.01-000; Planning Reference: AX-26-02; Second Council District) 29 30 ADOPTED: * 31 32 Action History 33 12/08/2025 – Scheduled for First Reading – City Council

FIRST READING Item #25. City of Dover PROPOSED ORDINANCE #2025-17 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: That Chapter 98 – Streets, Sidewalks, Storm Sewers, and Other Public Places, Article I – In General, be amended by inserting the text indicated in bold, blue font and deleting the text indicated in red strikeout as follows: Sec. 98-5. – Duty of tenants or owners to maintain sidewalks and landscaped areas within the street right-of-way. (a) It shall be unlawful for the owner or occupant of any premises abutting upon a sidewalk to permit or allow snow or ice to remain thereon for longer than 12 hours of daylight after it has ceased snowing, or to permit debris or other materials to accumulate at any time so that pedestrians may conveniently and safely pass. (b) It is the responsibility of the owner or occupant of any premises abutting upon a sidewalk to keep the landscaped area between the sidewalk and the curbline, or where no sidewalk exists between the property line and curbline or paved street, maintained in accordance with the standards set forth in chapter 114, article II, pertaining to weeds. (c) It shall be unlawful to sweep, blow, or otherwise discharge grass clippings into any street, sidewalk, storm drain, or water course more than incidental amounts of grass. (d) Violations; penalties. Any person(s) violating any provision of this section shall be fined as provided for in Appendix F—Fees and Fines. BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED: That Article V. – Storm sewers, be amended by inserting the text indicated in bold, blue font and deleting the text indicated in red strikeout as follows: Sec. 98-164. – Prohibited discharges into system. (a) Injurious substances. It shall be unlawful for any person or group of persons to throw, place, or deposit, or attempt to throw, place or deposit, or cause to be thrown, placed or deposited, any article, object or substance in any of the storm sewers or into any of the inlets into the storm sewers of the city, or into any of the streets, lanes, alleys, or gutters of the streets in the city from which such article, object, or substance would be likely to enter into or run into the storm sewers of the city, which object, or substance would injure in any manner said storm sewer system or area into which such storm sewers empty. (b) Definition. Wherever the term "system" is used, such term shall be taken to include, in additionPage 146 to any other meaning herein indicated, any conduits, reservoirs, ditches, grates, catch basins,

FIRST READING Item #25. storm manholes, gauges, and building or buildings and the attachments thereto wherein any such machinery or parts thereof are kept or stored. (c) Tar, petroleum, etc. It shall be unlawful to pour, drain or run into the storm sewers of the city, by any method whatsoever, any tar or tar product, or petroleum or petroleum product, or any inflammable substance or material. Trash produced by these products must be properly disposed of. (d) It shall be unlawful to sweep, blow, or otherwise discharge grass clippings into any street, alleyway, sidewalk, storm drain, or water course more than incidental amounts of grass. Amounts that constitute “more than incidental amounts” are at the discretion of the code official or the stormwater division personnel. (e) Unauthorized non-stormwater discharges include, but are not limited to: • Antifreeze/transmission fluid • Paint • Solvent/degreaser • Grease/oil • Detergent • Home improvement waste (concrete/mortar) • Pet/human waste • Yard waste (leaves, grass, mulch) • Excessive dirt and gravel • Trash • Pesticides and fertilizers • Pool/spa waters (f) Authorized non-stormwater discharges must be in accordance with the Phase II MS4 Tier I General Permit. (g) (d) Protection of equipment. It shall be unlawful to pour or drain into or permit the drainage into any of the storm sewers or storm sewer system of the city any substance or chemical which would hinder the proper functioning of the storm sewer system or in any way negatively impact any related permits held by the city. (e) Garbage, etc. It shall be unlawful to deposit or throw, or cause to be deposited or thrown into any receptacle connected with a public or private storm sewer of the city, any garbage, ashes, cinders, rags, waste of any kind whatsoever or to discharge or permit to be discharged into any private or public storm sewer within the city, anything that will injure such storm sewer or will obstruct the use and operation thereof. (h) Violations; Penalties. Any person(s) violating any provision of this section shall be fined as provided for in Appendix F – Fees and Fines. 1. First Offense. When prohibited discharges are unlawfully deposited into the stormwater system, a notice of violation will be issued with a citation in accordance with Appendix F – Fees and Fines. 2. Second Offense. When prohibited discharges are unlawfully deposited into thePage 147

FIRST READING Item #25. stormwater system, an additional notice of violation will be issued with a citation in accordance with Appendix F – Fees and Fines. 3. Third and Subsequent Offenses. When prohibited discharges are unlawfully deposited into the stormwater system, an additional notice of violation will be issued with a citation in accordance with Appendix F – Fees and Fines. 4. The City of Dover reserves the right to use all resources available to abate any violation that will cause immediate harm to the stormwater system. All associated costs will be billed to the property owner and/or a municipal lien will be placed against the property. Sec. 98-166. Violations (a) Notice. Whenever the city manager or his authorized agents shall determine that a condition exists which violates any portion of this article, the city manager or his authorized agents shall notify the property owner or occupant of the specific violation. (b) Action by city. Unless the condition is remedied within ten days 24 hours after notice is given, the city may cause the condition to be remedied and assess the cost thereof against the property owner. (c) Payment of cost. Any person violating any of the provisions of this article shall, upon conviction thereof, pay to the city the cost of any of the repairs resulting from the violation and be subject to the penalty provided in section 1-17 Sec. 98-167. Sump Pumps. (a) Testing. All persons wishing to begin or continue discharging sump pump water to any of the storm sewers, ditches, or inlets into the storm sewers of the city or into any of the streets, lanes, alleys, or gutters of the streets via a direct connection, must submit evidence from an accredited laboratory of testing that proves that all discharges from the sump pump are uncontaminated pumped groundwater and not unauthorized non-stormwater discharges. (b) Evidence. Evidence includes a Chain of Custody from the laboratory and a final report from an accredited laboratory, on official letterhead. The sample must be tested for MBAS, Oil &Grease, and pH. Evidence must be submitted to the Director of Public Works to maintain compliance with this ordinance. Evidence must be submitted to: Director of Public Works City of Dover 5 E. Reed St Dover, DE 19901 (c) Approval and Authorization. Upon approval from the Director of Public Works, citizens will receive an authorization letter. The authorization letter will have a date of authorization and a date of expiry. Within 30 days of the date of expiry, new evidence mustPage 148 be submitted to the Director of Public Works. Approval and authorization are at the full

FIRST READING Item #25. discretion of the Director of Public Works and his/her advisors. (d) Unlawful discharging. If at time it is discovered that a property is discharging its sump pump without an authorization letter, either because it was not applied for or because it has expired, a code official reserves the right to issue a notice of violation and order testing. The code official reserves the right to terminate all discharges pending the outcome of testing. The cost of any required testing shall be the responsibility of the property owner. All related costs shall be billed against the property and/or placed on the municipal lien docket for collection. (e) Penalties. If at any time it is discovered that a property is discharging its sump pump without an authorization letter, either because it was not applied for or because it has expired, a code official reserves the right to issue a notice of violation, order testing, and cause for the immediate termination of discharging pending the outcome of the investigation. All fines and fees will be charged in accordance with Appendix F. 1. Initial Inspection. When discharge of a sump pump is discovered without an authorization letter, the code official will issue a letter of violation and require testing. In the event the results are returned that the discharge is uncontaminated, pumped groundwater, and not an unauthorized non-stormwater discharge, the property owner will be issued an authorization letter. 2. First Occurrence. In the event the results are returned that the discharge is an unauthorized non-stormwater discharge, a notice of violation letter will be sent to the property owner, and a citation will be issued in accordance with Appendix F. The maximum time for compliance shall be 30 days from the date of each notice of violation. 3. Second Occurrence. In the event the results are returned that the discharge is an unauthorized non-stormwater discharge, and/or the discharge continues, a notice of violation letter will be sent to the property owner and a citation will be issued in accordance with Appendix F. The maximum time for compliance shall be 30 days from the date of each notice of violation. 4. Third and Subsequent Occurrence(s). In the even the results are returned that the discharge is an unauthorized non-stormwater discharge, and/or the discharge continues, a notice of violation letter will be sent to the property owner and a citation will be issued in accordance with Appendix F. The maximum time for compliance shall be 30 days from the date of each notice of violation. (f) Definition. Uncontaminated pumped groundwater is any discharge from a sump pump that is proven not to be unauthorized non-stormwater discharge. Secs. 98-167 98-168 – 98-220. – Reserved. BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED: That Appendix F – Fees and Fines, be amended by inserting the text indicated in bold, blue font as follows: Page 149 Chapter 98. – Streets, Sidewalks, Storm Sewers, and Other Public Places

FIRST READING Item #25. Chapter 98. Streets, Sidewalks, Storm Sewers, and Other Public Places Fees and Fines Article I. In General Sec. 98-5. Duty of tenants or owners to maintain sidewalks and $100.00 per violation landscaped areas within the street right-of-way Sec. 98-11. Placement of wireless communications facilities within rights- of-way (c) Use of Rights-of-Way Permit (1) Permit Fee $25.00 for ROW Permit (2) Annual Fee for Rights-of-way Use No charge for WCF placement on existing City owned wireless support structure in City ROW $220.00 for Placement of new wireless support structure/pole in City ROW $220.00 for WCF placement on a third party/non-City wireless support structure/pole in City ROW Sec. 98-12. Snow and ice removal from sidewalks in the public right-of-way. (c) Violations; penalties $50.00 per violation Article V. Storm Sewers Sec. 98-164. Subsec. (c) Tar, petroleum, etc., and Subsec. (e) Unauthorized non- stormwater discharges First Offense $250.00 Second Offense $500.00 Third and subsequent offense(s) $1,000.00 Sec. 98-167 Failure to renew or apply for authorization $100.00 First occurrence of unauthorized non-stormwater discharge $250.00 Second occurrence of authorized non-stormwater discharge $500.00 Third and subsequent occurrence(s) of unauthorized non-stormwater $1,000.00 discharge Article VI. Excavations Sec. 98-253. Bond Maximum of $5,000.00 per opening Article VII. Parades Page 150

FIRST READING Item #25. ADOPTED: * SYNOPSIS This Ordinance shall take effect on the first day of July after passage and approval. (SPONSORS: ANDERSON and HUGG) Action History 12/08/2025 – First Reading – City Council 11/25/2025 - Introduction – Council Committee of the Whole/ Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee Page 151

Item #26. City of Dover PROPOSED ORDINANCE #2025-21 WITH STAFF SUBSTITUTE #1 AND CITY COUNCIL AMENDMENT #1 (CITY COUNCIL AMENDMENT #1 IS INDICATED IN GREEN TEXT) 1 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN 2 COUNCIL MET: 3 4 That Chapter 106 – Traffic and Vehicles, Article III – Stopping, Standing, and Parking, Division 5 I - Generally, be amended by adding Sec. 106-139 – Pedestrian Safety by inserting the text 6 indicated in bold, blue font and deleting the text indicated in red strikeout as follows: 7 8 Sec. 106-139. – Pedestrian Safety. 9 10 A. Limitation of occupancy of medians or the adjacent roadway at intersections 11 serves to prevent driver distraction, traffic congestion, delay of traffic, and 12 accidents, especially on median strips or in the roadway itself. 13 14 B. No person, other than a person in or on a vehicle, shall stand, sit, or remain on a 15 portion of a City Street as designated below and approach any vehicle in 16 operation causing it to slow or stop, except a vehicle that is legally parked at the 17 curb on the shoulder. 18 19 C. No person shall stand, sit, or remain upon a median of a City Street as designated 20 below unless that person is in the process of crossing the highway in a safety 21 zone or crosswalk. It is prima facie evidence of a violation of this sub-section if a 22 person stays on the median through two consecutive opportunities to complete 23 their crossing of the highway in a legal manner under this Chapter and the State 24 of Delaware traffic laws. This may include, but would not be limited to, a change 25 in the traffic control signal or a lack of traffic, as applicable. After such two 26 consecutive opportunities, such a person shall not be considered to be “using 27 the safety zone or crosswalk to cross the highways”. 28 29 D. No operator of a vehicle shall park, stop, or leave standing a vehicle, or permit a 30 passenger to leave it, on any City Street where prohibited or suddenly decrease 31 the speed of said vehicle or deviate from a traffic lane for the purpose of 32 responding to persons violating this ordinance. Page 153

Item #26. 33 E. This ordinance applies to intersections at any street or right-of-way within the 34 incorporated boundaries of The City of Dover, but only for the first two-hundred 35 (200) feet on major principal arterials, minor arterials, and urban collectors and 36 one-hundred (100) feet on the urban local street system as defined in the City’s 37 currently adopted Comprehensive Plan, measured along the center lines at the 38 designated painted stop bars where the two rights-of-way intersect. Boundaries 39 will be defined by appropriate marking or signage, but such is not required where 40 impractical. Failure to mark a boundary does not limit the enforcement of this 41 ordinance. 42 43 F. Violators may be charged a fine as specified in Appendix F. A law enforcement 44 officer shall have discretion to consider reasonable defenses to this Section, 45 such as mechanical breakdown, etc. 46 47 G. This ordinance shall not apply to sidewalks, private property, or other pedestrian 48 walkways not within a vehicular lane of travel. 49 Secs. 106-139 140 – 106-160. – Reserved. 50 51 BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED: 52 53 That Appendix F – Fees and Fines, be amended by inserting the text indicated in bold, blue font 54 as follows: 55 56 Chapter 106. – Traffic and Vehicles Chapter 106. Traffic and Vehicles Fees and Fines Article I. In General 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. Sec. 106-7. Obedience to state law; violation of any provision of 21 A fine of not less Del. C. § 101 et seq. (except Sec. 106-7(1)—Handicapped parking than $25.00, nor and Sec. 106-7(2)—Fire lanes) more than $1,000.00 Subsec. (1) Handicapped parking Minimum fine, as defined in 21 Del. C. § 4183, at the time the violation occurs Subsec. (2) Fire lanes Minimum fines, as defined in 21 Del. C. § 7001(a), at the time the violation occurs Sec. 106-14. Off-road motor vehicle regulations Subsec. (d) Penalties A minimum fine of $25.00 and a maximum fine of Page 154

Item #26. $100.00 Sec. 106-15. Failure to stop for a red traffic signal; traffic light signal violation monitoring program; penalties Subsec. (b)(3) Traffic light signal violation monitoring program; civil or administrative assessment Failure to comply with a traffic light signal $75.00 If not paid within 14 days, an additional assessment shall be added $10.00 to the original assessment Additional assessment shall be increased if the assessment is not $20.00 paid within 45 days Additional assessment shall be increased if the assessment is not $30.00 paid within 90 days Court costs or similar administrative fees may also be assessed if Maximum $30.00 the owner requests a hearing to contest the violation, and is ultimately found to be in violation or fails to pay or contest the violation in a timely manner Sec. 106-16. Violations; except as otherwise provided Subsec. (a)(1) Moving offense Minimum of $10.00 Subsec. (a)(2) Nonmoving offense Minimum of $15.00 Subsec. (a)(3) Parking violation $20.00 for each offense, if the fine is paid within 72 hours from the date the offense is recorded in time, the fine shall be $15.00 Article II. Bicycles 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. Sec. 106-55. Penalties for violation Not to exceed $100.00 and not less than $10.00 Article III. Stopping, Standing and Parking Sec. 106-135. Residential parking Subsec. (i)(1) Expiration; Two-hour parking $20.00 fine or $15.00 if paid within 72 hours of issuance of such fine Subsec. (i)(2) Expiration; change of residence, etc. $20.00 fine or $15.00 if paid within 72 hours of issuance of such fine Subsec. (m) Violations; penalties Any violation of this section not having a stated, specified Page 155

Item #26. penalty will result in a $20.00 fine or $15.00 if paid within 72 hours of issuance of such fine Sec. 106-137. Parking areas for persons with disabilities Subsec. (c)(3) Signage; fines Failure to achieve compliance within 30 calendar days of the issuance of the notice of violation shall be subject to the fines set forth in subsection (f) of this section Subsec. (f) Penalties Whoever violates this section shall be fined not less than the minimum fine as defined in 21 Del. C. § 4183 at the time the violation occurred Sec. 106-139. Pedestrian Safety $50.00 Sec. 106-139. Pedestrian Safety First Offense Written Warning Second Offense $15.00 Third Offense within a twelve (12) month period $50.00 Sec. 106-163. Use of meters required Subsec. (a) Failure to make the required payment in the parking $20.00 fine or $15.00 meter if paid within 72 hours of issuance of such fine Subsec. (b) Payments accepted Each $0.25 coin Permits the vehicle to be parked for a period of one hour Each $1.00 Permits the vehicle to be parked for the duration of the enforcement period of 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Sec. 106-164 Violations; penalties Subsec. (a) Generally; each violation if paid within 24 hours from A fine of not less time summons giving notice of violation is issued than $1.00 for each violation Page 156

Item #26. Subsec. (a) Generally; each violation if paid after expiration of 24 $2.00 for each hours from time summons giving notice of violation is issued violation, if payment is made voluntarily prior to the time and date set forth in the summons Subsec. (a) Fourth violation; each violation if paid within one hour $1.00 for each such from time summons giving notice of violation is issued violation Subsec. (a) Fourth violation; each violation if paid after expiration $2.00 for each of one hour from time summons giving notice of violation is issued violation, if payment is made voluntarily prior to the time and date set forth in the summons Subsec. (a) Fifth violation, etc.; any person committing more than $5.00 for each such four violations within any 30-day period of the provisions of this violation, if payment division is made voluntarily prior to the time and date set forth in the summons. Subsec. (b)(4) Any person who unlawfully removes a device for $500.00 fine for each immobilization of a vehicle violation Subsec. (b)(5) Any person who tows or otherwise moves an $500.00 fine for each immobilized vehicle without authorization by the chief of police or his violation designee Subsec. (c) Cost. No cost will be assessed if payment of the penalty as hereinbefore imposed is voluntarily paid without the necessity of a hearing before the proper official. 57 58 59 ADOPTED: * 60 61 62 SYNOPSIS 63 This Ordinance shall take effect on the first day of July after passage and approval. 64 65 (SPONSORS: * and *) 66 67 68 Action History 69 12/08/2025 – Scheduled for First Reading – City Council 70 11/25/2025 – Staff Substitute Scheduled for Reintroduction – Council Committee of the Whole/Legislative, 71 Finance, and Administration Committee 72 10/25/2025 - Introduction – Council Committee of the Whole/ Legislative, Finance, and Administration 73 Committee (referred back to staff) Page 157