packet

REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA JULY 13, 2015 - 7:30 P.M. CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 15 LOOCKERMAN PLAZA DOVER, DELAWARE OPEN FORUM - 15 MINUTES PRIOR TO OFFICIAL MEETING (7:15 P.M.) THE “OPEN FORUM” SEGMENT IS PROVIDED TO EXTEND THE OPPORTUNITY TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC TO SHARE THEIR QUESTIONS, THOUGHTS, COMMENTS, CONCERNS, AND COMPLAINTS. DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM APPEARING ON THE AGENDA AS A PUBLIC HEARING IS PROHIBITED DURING THE OPEN FORUM AS AN OPPORTUNITY WILL BE PROVIDED DURING CONSIDERATION OF THAT ITEM. CITIZEN COMMENTS ARE LIMITED TO THREE (3) MINUTES. COUNCIL IS PROHIBITED FROM TAKING ACTION SINCE THEY ARE NOT IN OFFICIAL SESSION; HOWEVER, THEY MAY SCHEDULE SUCH ITEMS AS REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS AND ACT UPON THEM IN THE FUTURE. INVOCATION BY BISHOP THOMAS L. HOLSEY PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE LED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT SLAVIN AGENDA ADDITIONS/DELETIONS * CONSENT AGENDA THOSE ITEMS ON THE COUNCIL AGENDA WHICH ARE CONSIDERED ROUTINE AND NON- CONTROVERSIAL SHALL BE MARKED WITH AN ASTERISK (*) AND WILL BE ACTED UPON BY A SINGLE ROLL CALL VOTE OF THE COUNCIL. THERE WILL BE NO SEPARATE DISCUSSION OF THESE ITEMS UNLESS A MEMBER OF COUNCIL SO REQUESTS, IN WHICH EVENT THE MATTER SHALL BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND CONSIDERED A SEPARATE ITEM. * 1. ADOPTION OF MINUTES - REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 2. PUBLIC HEARING - VIOLATION OF THE DANGEROUS BUILDING ORDINANCE - PROPERTY LOCATED AT 200 NORTH WEST STREET, OWNED BY MARY LOU BASHORE (STAFF RECOMMENDS: 1) DECLARING THIS BUILDING AND ALL ACCESSORY STRUCTURES ON THIS PROPERTY DANGEROUS; 2) ORDERING THE PROPERTY DEMOLISHED BY AUGUST 13, 2015 BY THE OWNER OR EQUITY OWNER AT THEIR OWN RISK; 3) ORDERING THE BUILDING INSPECTOR TO CAUSE THE DEMOLITION OF THE STRUCTURES IF NOT COMPLETED BY THE OWNER WITHIN 10 DAYS OF THE DATE ESTABLISHED BY CITY COUNCIL; 4) ORDERING THE CITY MANAGER WITH THE ASSISTANCE OF THE CITY SOLICITOR TO CAUSE THE COST OF REPAIRS OR DEMOLITION TO BE CHARGED AGAINST THE LAND ON WHICH THE BUILDING EXISTS AS A MUNICIPAL LIEN OR CAUSE SUCH COST TO BE ADDED TO THE TAX DUPLICATE AS AN ASSESSMENT, OR TO BE LEVIED AS A SPECIAL TAX, OR TO BE RECOVERED IN A SUIT AT LAW AGAINST THE OWNER.)

COUNCIL AGENDA - JULY 13, 2015 PAGE 2 3. PUBLIC HEARING - VIOLATION OF THE DANGEROUS BUILDING ORDINANCE - PROPERTY LOCATED AT 311 NORTH GOVERNORS AVENUE, OWNED BY JEAN E. MACDONALD (STAFF RECOMMENDS: 1) DECLARING THIS BUILDING AND ALL ACCESSORY STRUCTURES ON THIS PROPERTY DANGEROUS; 2) ORDERING THE PROPERTY REPAIRED OR DEMOLISHED BY AUGUST 13, 2015 BY THE OWNER OR EQUITY OWNER AT THEIR OWN RISK; 3) ORDERING THE BUILDING INSPECTOR TO CAUSE THE REPAIR OR DEMOLITION OF THE STRUCTURES IF NOT COMPLETED BY THE OWNER WITHIN 10 DAYS OF THE DATE ESTABLISHED BY CITY COUNCIL; 4) ORDERING THE CITY MANAGER WITH THE ASSISTANCE OF THE CITY SOLICITOR TO CAUSE THE COST OF REPAIRS OR DEMOLITION TO BE CHARGED AGAINST THE LAND ON WHICH THE BUILDING EXISTS AS A MUNICIPAL LIEN OR CAUSE SUCH COST TO BE ADDED TO THE TAX DUPLICATE AS AN ASSESSMENT, OR TO BE LEVIED AS A SPECIAL TAX, OR TO BE RECOVERED IN A SUIT AT LAW AGAINST THE OWNER.) * 4. DOVER HUMAN RELATIONS COMMISSION REPORT - MARCH 10, 2015 A. PRESENTATION - DELAWARE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, OFFICE OF CIVIL RIGHTS AND PUBLIC TRUST (ALLISON REARDON, DIRECTOR) (COMMISSION ACTION NOT REQUIRED) B. PRESENTATION - DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT INCENTIVES (COMMISSION ACTION NOT REQUIRED) * 5. SAFETY ADVISORY AND TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE REPORT - JUNE 22, 2015 A. DISCUSSION - PROPOSED COMMITTEE TO STUDY THE BASIC LIFE SAFETY (BLS) NEEDS FOR THE CITY OF DOVER (COMMITTEE TOOK NO ACTION) B. REQUEST FOR THREE-WAY STOP AT THE INTERSECTION OF DWIGHT COURT AND GEORGE WASHINGTON DRIVE (COMMITTEE TOOK NO ACTION) C. PROPOSED 15 MPH SPEED LIMITS FOR ALLEY WAYS (COMMITTEE REFERRED THIS MATTER TO STAFF FOR REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATION ,TO BE FOLLOWED UP AT THE COMMITTEE'S NEXT MONTHLY MEETING) D. DISCUSSION - INCREASED CRIMINAL ACTIVITY - LINCOLN PARK SUBDIVISION (COMMITTEE RECOMMENDED THAT THE DOVER POLICE DEPARTMENT INCREASE THEIR PRESENCE IN THE SIMON CIRCLE AND LINCOLN PARK AREAS, AS THEY HAD IN THE OTHER LOCATION NEAR STATE STREET, AND CONCENTRATE ON THE ALLEY WAY AND THE AREAS OF CONCERN) E. DISCUSSION - INCREASED CRIMINAL ACTIVITY - DOVER PARK/SILVER LAKE PARK (COMMITTEE DEFERRED DUE TO TIME CONSTRAINTS) F. OVERVIEW - LOOCKERMAN STREET/FOREST STREET IMPROVEMENTS (ROUNDABOUT) (COMMITTEE DEFERRED DUE TO TIME CONSTRAINTS) G. DISCUSSION ITEMS PROPOSED DURING THE FY 2015/16 BUDGET REVIEW G-1. COMPREHENSIVE REVIEW OF FIRE APPARATUS LIFECYCLE (COMMITTEE DEFERRED DUE TO TIME CONSTRAINTS) G-2. COST RECOVERY FOR VIOLATIONS OF THE DANGEROUS BUILDING ORDINANCE (DEMOLITIONS) (COMMITTEE DEFERRED DUE TO TIME CONSTRAINTS) H. UPDATE - AMBULANCE SERVICE STATISTICS (COMMITTEE DEFERRED DUE TO TIME CONSTRAINTS)

COUNCIL AGENDA - JULY 13, 2015 PAGE 3 * 6. UTILITY COMMITTEE REPORT - JUNE 22, 2015 A. HOUSE BILL NO. 171 AMENDING TITLES 9 AND 22 OF THE DELAWARE CODE RELATING TO TAXES ON SPECIAL BETTERMENTS (COMMITTEE ACTION NOT REQUIRED) B. OVERVIEW OF CITY UTILITIES (COMMITTEE ACTION NOT REQUIRED) C. TEA/NAES REPORTS (MARCH AND APRIL) (COMMITTEE TOOK NO ACTION) D. DISCUSSION ITEM PROPOSED DURING THE FY 2015/16 BUDGET REVIEW - COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS OF POWER PLANT OPERATION (COMMITTEE TOOK NO ACTION) E. UPDATES (COMMITTEE DEFERRED DUE TO TIME CONSTRAINTS) * 7. LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE REPORT - JUNE 22, 2015 A. DISPOSITION OF CITY OWNED LAND - PROPERTIES LOCATED AT 423 COLLINS DRIVE, 749 WEST NORTH STREET, AND 29 SOUTH GOVERNORS AVENUE (COMMITTEE RECOMMENDED THAT THE PROPERTIES LOCATED AT 423 COLLINS DRIVE, 749 WEST NORTH STREET, AND 29 SOUTH GOVERNORS AVENUE BE DESIGNATED TO BE SOLD AND DETERMINED TO BE EXCESS PROPERTY, AND THAT THE CITY MANAGER BE AUTHORIZED TO DISPOSE OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTIES USING THE "STANDARD METHOD OF DISPOSITION." ) B. DISCUSSION ITEMS PROPOSED DURING BUDGET REVIEW B-1. DUE DILIGENCE RESEARCH ON HEALTH INSURANCE COSTS (COMMITTEE RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF MAYOR CHRISTIANSEN'S PROPOSAL TO GO FORWARD WITH THE HEALTH INSURANCE COST RESEARCH, TO INCLUDE THE CREATION OF A COMMITTEE TO CONSIST OF AT LEAST TWO (2) MEMBERS OF COUNCIL, THE CITY MANAGER, MAYOR, HUMAN RESOURCES DIRECTOR, AND THE CONTROLLER/TREASURER OR HER ASSISTANT) B-2. PERFORMANCE AUDIT OF CIVILIAN SIDE OF CITY GOVERNMENT (COMMITTEE RECOMMENDED THAT THE STAFF STRATEGIC PLANNING TEAM AND MEMBERS OF COUNCIL DEVELOP IDEAS BY AUGUST 1, 2015 AND A WORKSHOP BE SCHEDULED AFTER AUGUST 1, 2015) B-3. PROPOSED NEW REVENUE SOURCES FOR FY 2016/17 (COMMITTEE TOOK NO ACTION ON THIS ITEM-WILL BE CONSIDERED IN AUGUST OR SEPTEMBER) B-4. PUBLIC SAFETY FEE STUDY (COMMITTEE DEFERRED CONSIDERATION OF THIS ITEM) B-5. REVIEW OF ALL LIFECYCLE ITEMS (REPORT TO COMMITTEE IN 90 DAYS) (COMMITTEE TOOK NO ACTION ON THIS ITEM-WILL BE COMBINED WITH PERFORMANCE AUDIT) B-6. REVIEW OF INTERNAL APPLICANT HIRING/TRAINING OPPORTUNITIES (COMMITTEE TOOK NO ACTION ON THIS ITEM) B-7. REVIEW OF THE PAY SYSTEM (COMMITTEE RECOMMENDED THAT THE LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE REVIEW OTHER CITIES IN ORDER TO COMPLETE A COMPARISON OF THE PAY FOR THE CITY'S EMPLOYEES VERSUS OTHER CITY EMPLOYEES, AND THAT A LIST OF CITIES BE CREATED THAT MEMBERS DEEM APPROPRIATE TO REVIEW FOR RECOMMENDATIONS)

COUNCIL AGENDA - JULY 13, 2015 PAGE 4 * 7. LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE REPORT - JUNE 22, 2015 B. DISCUSSION ITEMS PROPOSED DURING BUDGET REVIEW (CONTINUED) B-8. REVIEW OF PLANNING APPLICATION, ZONING VERIFICATION, ITINERANT MERCHANT, SAFE COMMUNITIES, RESIDENTIAL VACANT BUILDING AND HOUSING VIOLATION FEES (COMMITTEE DEFERRED CONSIDERATION OF THIS ITEM) B-9. REVIEW OF PLANNING AND INSPECTIONS FEES (BY DECEMBER 31, 2015) (COMMITTEE DEFERRED CONSIDERATION OF THIS ITEM) B-10. TIMELINE FOR REVIEW OF FISCAL YEAR 2016/17 BUDGET (COMMITTEE DEFERRED CONSIDERATION OF THIS ITEM UNTIL THEIR NEXT MEETING) * 8. MONTHLY REPORTS - MAY 2015 A. CITY ASSESSOR’S REPORT B. CITY MANAGER’S REPORT C. CITY PLANNER’S REPORT D. CONTROLLER/TREASURER’S BUDGET REPORT E. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OFFICE REPORT F. FIRE CHIEF’S REPORT G. POLICE CHIEF’S REPORT 9. GRANT APPLICATION EVALUATION - WATER TREATMENT PLANT PROCESS IMPROVEMENTS (STAFF RECOMMENDS AUTHORIZATION TO SUBMIT THE GRANT APPLICATION TO DHSS FOR A DRINKING WATER MATCHING PLANNING GRANT FOR THE SECOND PHASE OF DESIGN FOR THE CITY OF DOVER WATER TREATMENT PLANT PROCESS IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE FINANCE DEPARTMENT’S GRANT APPLICATION PROCEDURE F317) * 10. COUNCIL APPOINTMENTS - YOUTH ADVISORY COMMITTEE - ONE (1) YEAR TERMS TO EXPIRE MAY 9, 2016 A. JORDAN HARMON B. ROCHER HOPKINS C. ZORANA ILIC D. MICHAEL KOSIOR E. THERESA MORRIS F. LAUREN SCOTT 11. COUNCIL MEMBERS’ ANNOUNCEMENTS /TM S:\AGENDAS-MINUTES-PACKETS-PRESENTATIONS-ATT&EXH\COUNCIL-AGENDAS\2015\07-13-2015.WPD THE AGENDA ITEMS AS LISTED MAY NOT BE CONSIDERED IN SEQUENCE. THIS AGENDA IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE TO INCLUDE THE ADDITION OR THE DELETION OF ITEMS, INCLUDING EXECUTIVE SESSIONS.

REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING The Regular Council Meeting was held on June 22, 2015 at 7:30 p.m. with Council President Slavin presiding. Council members present were Mr. Anderson, Mr. Sudler, Mr. Neil, Mr. Lewis, Mr. Cole, Mr. Hosfelt, Mr. Hare, and Mr. Hutchison. Council staff members present were Deputy Police Chief Mailey, Mrs. Mitchell, Mr. Koenig, Mrs. Townshend, Deputy Fire Chief Carey, City Solicitor Rodriguez, and Mrs. McDowell. Mayor Christiansen was also present (departed at 7:54 p.m.). OPEN FORUM The Open Forum was held at 7:15 p.m., prior to commencement of the Official Council Meeting. Council President Slavin declared the Open Forum in session and reminded those present that Council was not in official session and could not take formal action. Ms. Judy Diogo, Central Delaware Chamber of Commerce (CDCC), 435 North DuPont Highway, stated that she was present to ask City Council to take another look at the budget, noting that increases in property tax and electric were proposed. She indicated that the CDCC had collected data from some of its members and, for one (1) of the larger corporations, it could add $120,000 in a year on their expense side when electric and property taxes were put together. In factories, it could be between $200,000 and $215,000 per year. One of their medium businesses, a hotel, would be looking at $5,500 more for one (1) year with the property and the electric increase, and a small business was looking at approximately $1,000. Ms. Diogo stated her belief that all had worked really well together and had come a long way in getting Dover on the short list for a lot of companies and corporations. She stated that she hated to see Dover going backward instead of forward. Ms. Diog advised members that the CDCC stood ready and willing to put together their budget focus group, as had been done in the past, and sit down with the City and try to come up with a better picture, in particular for manufacturers who would really be getting hurt by this electric increase. She requested that there be discussion this evening about possibly removing the commercial increase from the budget. Mr. Mike Bramble stated that he was representing Procter & Gamble, 1340 West North Street. He stated that he would like to provide their feelings regarding the electric rate increase as just mentioned. He informed members that they would see an increase of roughly $25,000 to $45,000 just from the electrical rate increase, which was troubling, even more so since they just had an expansion during this last year and Procter & Gamble was in the midst of hiring between 30 and 50 people for that expansion. Mr. Bramble indicated that their company headquarters decides electrical rates or goes into the puzzle of deciding what existing facility they are going to invest their capital dollars in. He wanted to pass on that this really hurts, and expansion means jobs, which he felt would help the City more than a tax increase. Mr. Alan Geddis, 448 North State Street, thanked the originators and revisers of the City of Dover budget for their work in paring it down to essentials and not kicking the can down the road. He thanked Mr. Scott Koenig, City Manager; Mrs. Donna Mitchell, Controller/Treasurer; Mrs. Ann Marie Townshend, Director of Planning and Community Development; Mrs. Cheryl Bundek, Tax Assessor, and their staffs. Mr. Gaddis expressed his opinion that their

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 2 explanations during the five (5) Council budget meetings were thorough, to the point, and clear. He also stated his thanks to those members of City Council who, by attending all five (5) meetings, put forth much effort, input, suggestions, and consideration. They showed courage in presenting the revised budget for Fiscal Year 2016 for a final vote. Mr. Gaddis that all had done their best for the citizens of Dover. Mr. George Gaudioso, 167 Maple Glen Drive, stated that common sense tells everyone that no one likes their taxes raised and everyone realizes that it will have an impact on business. The question had to be put as to the priority of what is important for the City. It is not easy to balance the needs of the citizenry and the resources available to meet those needs. Mr. Gaudioso stated that no one, including himself, wanted to see any of the businesses - big, medium, or small - impacted negatively; however, somehow the City had to have the resources to meet the needs of its citizens. He remarked that some people say they should cut, cut, cut, but they always want the cut to be made so that they are not directly impacted, noting that Council has a difficult row to hoe. Mr. Gaudioso expressed his belief that the City was in this set of circumstances not because of today but because of actions taken in the past that did not address the financial needs of the City. He indicated that some people, including his friends, got mad when he pointed out a couple of months ago that the only viable way to balance the budget of the City of Dover was by having a tax increase because the City needs the revenue to be financially viable, and this is not easy to balance. Mr. Gaudioso stated that many people do not realize how much the Electric Fund has subsidized the running of the City, noting that the plant is antiquated and needs upgrading, which will cost money. He expressed his hope that the City would not look for short-term gain and in the end have long-term financial pain. Ms. Sarah Herbert, 223 North Bradford Street, stated that she absolutely agreed with the gentleman that spoke and also with Mr. Gaddis. She advised members that she had never attended budget hearings before, thinking that they would be boring, but they were not. She felt that if more citizens had come and heard how hard everybody was working to meet all the needs, including infrastructure, public safety, etc., and if all of the commissioners and councilmen had come, they would be very impressed with what had been done. Mrs. Herbert stated that she went home with a whole, new attitude about making budgets, noting that it is a lot harder than doing her grocery list. She thought that people need to understand that there were many things to balance, that they did an excellent job, and she expressed her thanks. Ms. Paula Kinsey, resident of 224 North State Street and owner of the Tea House at that location, advised members that she was present to maybe offend some of the staff, but she agreed with what the gentleman said. She stated that she did not know personally of anybody’s budget that does not expand every year. Ms. Kinsey questioned what was being done to collect the hundreds of thousands of dollars that had not been paid in taxes. Responding, Mr. Koenig stated that the City was in the process of trying to collect those monies, and those efforts would go up to and include the sale of property. He explained that when a property is in arrears for taxes, electric, water, and sewer funds for a certain amount of time, that property goes to a sheriff sale and the City collects the tax and becomes the owner of the property. The City also has a clean hands ordinance, although it is not easy to apply because of the number of customers. Mr. Koenig stated that the issue of back taxes is common among a number of property owners in the City who feel it is not necessary to pay their taxes on time. He stated that staff would continue to pursue that diligently going forward, up to and including denial of service.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 3 Mrs. Kinsey stated that she also lives in Culpeper, Virginia, and in that municipality the names, addresses, and amounts owed by such property owners are listed in the paper. She thought that this might be helpful as the embarrassment might help someone to decide to pay their taxes. She felt that this was an urgent matter that needed to be pushed. Ms. Jean Dowding, realtor, veteran educator, and citizen of the City, stated that she was speaking not just for herself but for the hundreds of Realtors who work in Dover and Kent County, for the buyers who need to buy homes, for the sellers who are selling their homes, and for the folk who are dealing with the challenges of a very slowly recovering economy. She asked members to think hard tonight and first do no harm. Ms. Dowding asked, looking at utility rates, transfer taxes, and City of Dover taxes, where breaks were being given to first-time home buyers, that members recognize that some of the budget issues being discussed were critical and make up a tremendous amount of those particular buyers' closing costs. In addition, she stated that all of the small business owners, including plumbers, electricians, and home inspectors are involved in this process, and real estate broker/owners are working with another whole group of realtors. Ms. Dowding explained that when one (1) person buys a home in Dover, this household will easily put $50,000 back into the economy. She thanked members for their attention and for finding new ways to be creative. She indicated that she knew what it meant to do budgets for large and small corporations and for one (1) person or 10-person businesses. Responding to Mr. Sudler, Ms. Dowding stated that she was against the utility hike as it stood at present. Mr. Neil questioned if she was aware that the rates for residential customers are one (1) of the lowest in the State. Ms. Dowding indicated that she was. Mr. Neil questioned if Mrs. Dowding was aware that a lot of the increase in the budget was due to the fact that the City has 10 additional policeman and nine (9) cadets. He asked if Ms. Dowding thought that homebuyers would feel safer if the City had these employees, or if she would prefer to cut them in order to cut the budget. Responding, Ms. Dowding agreed that this was critical, having security in the community was important, and it had to be done. She questioned, as constraints are tightened, if other things could be done. For example, she felt that the break on transfer tax for a first-time home buyer in the City of Dover was a good thing. Mr. Neil stated that the figures presented in the newspaper were actually incorrect because it is a revenue neutral budget. He explained that if everything stayed the same, the amount of money that was collected would be the same and not an addition; however, there were additional things being considered, like the police and a contractual 16.2% increase in health care costs. Ms. Dowding responded that she did not disagree with this; however, she stated that not just residences but small businesses would be impacted as things stood currently. She asked that members first do no harm, stating that she did not have all the answers, which may not even be found at this time, in this room, or in this place. She recognized the challenge involved. Mr. Slavin expressed appreciation to the speakers for their time. The invocation was given by Reverend Henderson, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 4 Mr. Slavin requested members to join in a moment of silence in sympathy for the family of Mr. William Pepper, Deputy City Solicitor, in the recent loss of his wife. AGENDA ADDITIONS/DELETIONS Mr. Hutchison moved for approval of the agenda, seconded by Mr. Hosfelt and unanimously carried. Mr. Neil moved for approval of the Consent Agenda, seconded by Mr. Hutchison and carried by a unanimous roll call vote. ADOPTION OF MINUTES - REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 8, 2015 The minutes of the Regular Council Meeting of June 8, 2015 were unanimously approved by motion of Mr. Neil, seconded by Mr. Hutchison and bore the written approval of Mayor Christiansen. CERTIFICATE OF RECOGNITION - YOUNG’S STUDIO The City Clerk read the following Certificate of Recognition into the record: WHEREAS, Young’s Studio of Photography was founded by Ross and Lois Young on Loockerman Street in Dover on August 10, 1953 and has been a fixture in the downtown Dover area ever since. Their son, Eric Young, joined the family enterprise in 1988 and continued to work in the Studio with his mother following the passing of his father in 2014; and WHEREAS, after nearly 62 years of continuous operation in Dover, Young’s Studio of Photography closed its doors on June 15, 2015; and WHEREAS, the Youngs took the time and effort to get to know their customers and their specific needs. They spent decades refining their craft and enhancing their skills to provide a full range of traditional and digital photography, using professional developing and processing techniques to ensure a quality product. The fruits of the Youngs’ efforts will live on in the countless photos that grace the homes of the grateful patrons whose memories they captured. NOW, THEREFORE, THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, DELAWARE, do hereby present this Certificate of Recognition to Young’s Studio of Photography in acknowledgment of their significant contributions to the community and extend their best wishes to Eric and Lois Young in all future endeavors. June 22, 2015 On behalf of the Mayor and Council, Mayor Christiansen presented the certificate to Mr. Eric Young and Mrs. Lois Young. He thanked them for their efforts and for recording the history of the City of Dover and being part of all of its families for 62 years.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 5 Mrs. Young advised members that it had been a great 62 years, stating her wish that they had more time but noting that things were not the way they used to be in business or in their lives. She expressed appreciation for the recognition, stating that everyone was in their hearts and noted that they would still be in Dover but not on Loockerman Street. Mr. Young stated that the recognition was heartwarming and he thanked everyone for being so supportive, including the City of Dover. He especially thanked his father and mother who embarked on this business in 1953, noting that he was blessed to have joined them 22 years after that. CERTIFICATE OF CONGRATULATIONS - DOVER HIGH SCHOOL BOYS TRACK AND FIELD TEAM The Clerk read the following Certificate into the record: Certificate of Congratulations presented to The Dover High School Boys Track and Field Team for its outstanding performance during the 2015 season, finishing the Henlopen Conference with 13 wins and no losses, winning the Delaware State Invitational, placing second in the Keith Burgess Invitational and third in the Bishop McNamara Invitational, and capturing the Henlopen Meet and Division 1 State Championships. Christian Adkins Breon Dennis Jeremy Lepore Amir Ross Jaden Adkins Nyjal Drayton Devin Locklin Rasaki Salawe Cameron Allison Nicholas Glover Riley Maldonado Sean Saxton Dion Baker John Goldman Xavier Marion Adam Spencer Dorian Baker Devin Hagaman Antwaun Matthews Clarence Spencer Marcus Batson Naquone Harris-Dukes Jordan McCullough Dorion Sudler Karim Beatty Deontray Hickman Antoine McDonald Brandon Walker Khari Bonelli Jemir Hunter Tre’Vonne Moore Jonathan Waters Jason Brittingham Temple Jefferson Chidi Nwogbaga Alshawn Wheeler Marshal Capinpin Aaron Johnson Raphael Okonkwo Zaire White John Rodel Castro DaJuan Jordan Travon Robinson Gavin Williams Tayshaun Chisholm Nykiem Lee Donovan Rogers DeVontae Wilson The following team members received 1st Team All State Designation: Roderick Brown Ronald Jones Kyron Roberts Darius Taylor Mykele Young-Sanders The entire team and Coaches James Solomon (State of Delaware Track and Field Coach of the Year 2015), Roger Lilly, Michael Denny, Constance Hayes, James Kilby, Vincent Terenik, Dwayne Wilson, and are commended for their hard work, dedication, and commitment. The City of Dover extends its sincere congratulations. June 22, 2015

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 6 On behalf of the City, Mayor, and Council, Mayor Christiansen presented the Certificates of Recognition to Coach James Solomon and expressed pride in the accomplishments of the team and coaches. Mr. Solomon thanked everyone for the momentous occasion and awards on behalf of the Capital School District, Superintendent Dr. Michael Thomas and his administration; Dr. Evelyn Edney, former principal at Dover High School, and her administration, faculty, and staff; and the young men and women who represent Dover. He expressed gratitude that God had given him a chance to make a difference in the lives of these young men and women. Mr. Sudler stated that he had known Coach Solomon for many years and he had been a great inspiration in Mr. Sudler’s life. As a Dover High Senator, Mr. Sudler told the young men that they had done a great job. RECOGNITION OF SERVICE - DAVID J. TRUAX The Clerk read the following Certificate into the record: CERTIFICATE OF APPRECIATION Presented to DAVID J. TRUAX for his service as a member of the Safety Advisory and Transportation Committee July 2014 - May 2015 Your public service, selflessness, and talents have increased the quality of life for the residents of the City of Dover June 22, 2015 On behalf of the Mayor and Council, Mayor Christiansen presented the certificate to Mr. Truax, stating that Mr. Truax had come to work in the City’s Inspections Department, moved to the top of his craft by becoming the City Fire Marshal, retired, and returned to serve the City as a member of the Safety Advisory and Transportation Committee. He noted that Mr. Truax was a true Doverian and public servant. Mr. Truax expressed his appreciation for the honor and the opportunity to serve. He offered future assistance to the City if needed in any matters pertaining to safety. RECOGNITION OF SERVICE - RICHARD SNAMAN On behalf of the Mayor, Council, and citizens of Dover, Mayor Christiansen presented Mr. Richard Snaman with a Dover Cup in recognition of his years of service to the City as a member of the Utility and Services to Seniors Committees and expressed appreciation for Mr. Snaman’s efforts.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 7 Mr. Snaman stated that he had loved Dover since moving here 25 years ago and had been happy to serve, initially on the Legislative and Finance Committee where he learned a lot. He stated that he had a history and knowledge of utilities before serving on the Utility Committee, having worked with a natural gas pipeline in his career. Mr. Snaman stated that it had been a privilege to serve. PARKS, RECREATION, AND COMMUNITY ENHANCEMENT COMMITTEE REPORT - JUNE 8, 2015 The Parks, Recreation, and Community Enhancement Committee met on June 8, 2015 with Chairman Anderson presiding. Review of Youth Advisory Committee Membership Applications Mr. Anderson advised members that several applications had been received for the Youth Advisory Committee (YAC), noting that there were several slots on the Committee to be filled. He stated his belief that at least five (5) more applications could be accepted and that additional young people could still be involved if they wanted to. Mr. Anderson indicated that past history had shown that typically some members of the YAC may drop out, and members who are older students may leave the area to attend college. He stated that members would review applications and rank them in order of their preference and then discuss them. Noting that there were potential applicants for the Committee in the audience, Mr. Lewis requested that Mr. Anderson provide a brief history of the YAC. Mr. Anderson stated that the Committee was originally started many years ago and then fell into disuse. Subsequently, former Councilwoman Sophia Russell attended a National League of Cities Conference where she heard about other successful youth councils. She returned to Dover, made revisions, and got a vibrant YAC started. Mr. Anderson stated that the YAC appealed to young people because it was about advocacy and provided an outlet for concerned young people to report to Council on issues relating to youth, so that their voices could be heard. Noting that many young people say there is nothing to do, Mr. Anderson stated that the YAC would also provide activities for young people. Having an official organization to access City facilities and connect with City events would help to cut through bureaucracy, and the young people would be involved with planning family-friendly events and recreational programs that are alcohol and drug free. Mr. Anderson stated that the Committee also has a leadership development aspect to it and would provide opportunity for participants to develop leadership skills, such as planning, goal setting, delegation, responsibility, budgeting, and being able to function in an adult world following structure and rules, which would benefit the participants throughout their lives. Mr. Caldwell questioned if there were a vision and direction for the young people and specific ideas for what they would do. Responding, Mr. Anderson stated that the YAC had started to develop their vision and goals, noting that part of this must come from members as the beginning of their leadership development. Mr. Anderson stated that one (1) project would be absolutely non-negotiable, a good New Year’s Eve event. He stated that this would give members a big goal that

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 8 excites them, as well as many people in the community. He stated that there had been many financial and other types of pledges from the community to support this. Mr. Anderson stated that youth members had also asked to be involved with Parks and Recreation Department events, such as a Concert on the Green. A First Friday event was being discussed with the Economic Development Office. Mr. Anderson felt that the youth members would be interested in asking questions and in advocacy, noting that some were very much touched by the violence that had been happening. He indicated the desire to make sure that there are outreach efforts, so there is a feeling that it is more “cool” to be with the people who are doing the right thing rather than those doing the wrong thing. Mrs. Horsey felt that this was an amazing leadership opportunity, noting the desire to capture our youth now. She inquired if having two (2) references was a requirement for applicants or just a recommendation. Responding, Mr. Anderson stated that there was no code requirement for a reference for any committee; however, preference would be given to applicants with recommendations. This would help members to judge them better since it would indicate that someone besides their mother thinks they are worthy of participating, and that they showed initiative and were able to approach someone to get a reference. The Committee recommended that Application D (Michael Gardner-Adult Applicant) be sent to Council with a favorable recommendation pending successful criminal background and clean hands checks. By consent agenda, Mr. Neil moved for approval of the Committee’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Hutchison and carried by a unanimous roll call vote. Mr. Anderson reviewed the rankings of the youth applicants for the Youth Advisory Committee. The Committee recommended approval of Application A (Zorana Ilic), Application C (Lauren Scott), Application F (Jordan Harmon), Application B (Michael Kosior) and that Application E (Rocher Hopkins) be approved for any slots that become open. By consent agenda, Mr. Neil moved for approval of the Committee’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Hutchison and carried by a unanimous roll call vote. Review of Planning, Inspections, and Recreation 2014 Annual Report Mrs. Ann Marie Townshend, Director of Planning and Community Development, advised members that the Review of the Planning, Inspections, and Recreation Annual 2014 Report would be considered by City Council during their Regular Meeting scheduled for later in the evening. Mrs. Townshend reviewed a presentation of the Planning, Inspections & Recreation 2014 Annual Report.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 9 Mrs. Townshend reviewed the 2014 highlights for the Department, noting that the Garrison Energy Center at the Garrison Oak Technology Park was scheduled to go online today and Uzin Utz had begun construction. In regard to Route 13 redevelopment, she advised members that the Produce Junction is underway at the former CompUSA site. Mrs. Townshend explained that 1,704 building permits were issued in 2014, which was slightly fewer than 2013. There were 44 new home construction permits in 2014, slightly fewer than the prior year. Permits for 2015 were starting to pick up slightly and 25 permits had been issued by five (5) months into the current year. She explained that rental permits and business licenses were somewhat flat, noting that rental permits had spiked back when the housing crisis was at its peak, and business licenses had not rebounded from a drop that occurred when the economy declined. Mrs. Townshend advised members that 34 applications were reviewed by the Planning Commission and 14 by the Board of Adjustment in 2014. She explained that architectural review certificates relate to administrative review of building permits to ensure compliance with Historic District guidelines, and some of these certificates are reviewed by the Historic District Commission. Mrs. Townshend indicated that 735 inspections or complaints were handled by the three (3) staff members of the Fire Marshal’s Office. There were 81 fire protection permits and 71 fire investigations, which was a significant increase over 2013. In regard to code enforcement, Mrs. Townshend stated that 8,184 inspections were performed and there were 4,007 cases, 82% of which were initiated by either Planning Department staff or through referrals from other City departments. In response to Mr. Lewis regarding the total amount of fines collected by the City, Mrs. Townshend stated that she could provide a breakdown of this amount at the Regular City Council Meeting scheduled later in the evening. Mrs. Townshend stated that there were just under 400 housing inspections, 560 property maintenance exterior cases, and 924 grass cases in 2014, and other violations amounted to a quarter of the caseload. Mrs. Townshend reviewed the statistics regarding vacant buildings. Responding to Mr. Anderson regarding how many of these buildings were commercial versus residential, Mrs. Townshend stated that there was no breakdown in the system; however, the vast majority of them are residential. She advised members that the vacant building ordinance was passed in 2006 to address a commercial issue; however, when the housing crisis hit, the ordinance became very important because there were so many vacant properties. The City now knows the location of these properties and can make sure they are secure and respond to issues that come up.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 10 In reviewing information related to the City’s Parks and Recreation Program, Mrs. Townshend informed members that leagues are a big revenue source for the Department, noting that a decline was being seen in softball, which had previously brought in large revenues. She indicated that the City’s Sports Coordinator had been working to build other leagues and it was hoped that indoor field hockey and girls’ indoor lacrosse would start to balance this out. Mrs. Townshend expressed her excitement regarding the City’s Challenger Sports Program, which includes football, cheerleading, and basketball. Students with disabilities from the John S. Charlton and Kent County Community Schools participate in this program, along with athletes from Dover High School who work as volunteers. Mrs. Townshend indicated that special needs participants benefit from the program, but it is also a valuable experience for the high school volunteers who work with them. Mrs. Townshend stated that staff had been working on planning future needs, including a Recreation Needs Assessment, noting that the draft of this document would be presented to members during their next meeting. She indicated that the City’s Second Annual Bike to Work Day was held in 2014 and participation increased in 2015, which was its third year. Mrs. Townshend advised members that community involvement in park planning is sought, explaining that a community meeting was held at Mallard Pond and children were invited to sit down with playground catalogs and draw the type of playground that they want. She stated that Super Summer Playground would be getting into full swing during the following week. Responding to Mr. Lewis regarding where the $104,000 received from vacant building fees goes, Mrs. Townshend stated that these fees go to the City’s General Fund. In response to Mr. Anderson’s request for information regarding the progress of the Capital City Trail and its link with the City recreation plan, Mrs. Townshend explained that this trail starts from Silver Lake, extends along Park Drive and runs behind the Delaware Public Archives, down Martin Luther King, Jr. Boulevard, and south along Route 13 to its intersection with Public Safety Boulevard. The trail can then be picked up from Public Safety Boulevard and extends to Route 10. Mrs. Townshend stated that, in looking at the Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan, which is the statewide needs assessment, trails and pathways were included at the top of the list. This was also true in the City and Mrs. Townshend expected that planning for trails would be ramped up. She stated that people would like loop trails around Dover and Schutte Parks. Mrs. Townshend noted that the Bicycle and Pedestrian Subcommittee was working to push forward the Senator Bikeway project, which would be an on and off road route along the Route 8 corridor linking with the Capital City Trail. It would include trails as well as lesser stressed streets that would be a safe place to ride for those who are not advanced cyclists.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 11 In response to Mr. Anderson regarding accommodating skateboarders, Mrs. Townshend stated that skateboarders could use multi-use trails. She indicated that skateboarding has two (2) components: 1) safe passage to and from destinations, and 2) a skate park. Mrs. Townshend stated that there is no place for skateboarders to do stunts, and they are currently using places like the steps of Legislative Hall for this purpose. Mr. Anderson stated that skateboarding was a big item, especially since a skateboarder had recently been killed. Mrs. Townshend concurred, noting that this skateboarder had been on the roadway. She indicated that bicycle and pedestrian improvements, such as those on Kenton Road, would involve a multi-use path, which would be safer for skateboarders. Mrs. Horsey concurred with the importance of addressing skateboarding, stating that she had seen skateboarders on Division Street and Governors Avenue going down the middle of the street, which was very dangerous. Mr. Anderson inquired about safety in the parks, noting that he had heard quite a few complaints about people sleeping in Silver Lake and park users not feeling comfortable when walking or running there close to dusk. Responding, Mrs. Townshend stated that the Planning Department provides programming related to parks and recreation and the Public Works Department maintains the parks. She stated that complaints had been received related to Silver Lake Park and Dover Park and had been forwarded to the Police Department. In regard to planning for Dover Park, Mrs. Townshend felt that improvements could be made in terms of lighting and vegetation maintenance; however, a police presence was needed to discourage certain behaviors. She advised members that the parks are technically closed from dusk to dawn and this is an issue because some people live and sleep in the parks, and there are other activities that are even more concerning happening in parks when they are technically closed. Mr. Anderson stated that perhaps these types of activities should be put on a future agenda and the police should be asked for grants for cameras, etc. Mrs. Townshend stated that the Police Department mentioned a grant for foot patrols and suggested that grant money could also be used to increase their presence in City’s parks. She felt having officers on bicycle or foot in the parks would be helpful. In regard to the Capital City Bike Trail, Mrs. Horsey stated that she was unsure if people know they have to cross the highway to pick up the trail and how to accomplish this to access the other part of the trail off Public Safety Boulevard. She suggested that perhaps a sign should be posted to indicate that the trail continues on the other side of Route 13. Mrs. Townshend stated that there is a signal, but other ways of crossing the highway had been discussed. She indicated that she could bring this up with the Kent County Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) and the Delaware Department of Transportation (DelDOT).

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 12 Mr. Lewis questioned if some of the employees from the Police Department’s new Cadet Program could be utilized to patrol the parks. In response, Mrs. Townshend stated that this would be a question for the Police Department. She suggested that park safety be added to a future agenda, since there are a wide range of related issues that occur, including sleeping in the parks, drug deals, and umpires feeling threatened. She suggested that Police Chief Paul Bernat be asked to come to the next meeting. Mr. Caldwell felt that safety would be a top concern with many of the people in the City and indicated that he would like to see more involvement by the Police Department. He stated that he was concerned about the behavior of the youth and programs established for them, noting that safety was his number one (1) concern. Mr. Anderson expressed the desire for the Committee to look at City policies, possibly in September when the Recreational Needs Assessment is complete, stating his concern that some of the policies may not be constitutionally compliant. Responding, Mrs. Townshend stated that most of the provisions enforced in the parks are designated in the Dover Code. In response to Mr. Anderson regarding a policy not to allow political activities in parks, Mrs. Townshend stated that this policy had been changed following a discussion with Mr. William Pepper, Deputy City Solicitor. By consent agenda, Mr. Neil moved for acceptance of the Parks, Recreation, and Community Enhancement Committee Report, seconded by Mr. Hutchison and carried by a unanimous roll call vote. LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE REPORT - JUNE 8, 2015 The Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee met on June 8, 2015 with Chairman Hare presiding. Disposition of City Owned Land – Property Located at 16 South Queen Street, 18 South Queen Street, and 24 North New Street Mr. Scott Koenig, City Manager, advised members that the City of Dover acquired properties located at 16 South Queen Street, 18 South Queen Street, and 24 North New Street at a monition sale due to liens for demolition expenses. He stated that the City had acquired several properties at monition sales over the past few years, explaining that staff attends the sales and in instances where the City is the largest lien holder on a property, the City has purchased the property to protect the City’s interest. Mr. Koenig stated that the subject properties are excess properties, as the City has no use for them and is better served by the properties being redeveloped and restored as taxable properties. He noted that the City has maintenance responsibilities associated with the properties and has no long-term interest in owning them. Mr. Koenig

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 13 advised that the City has a procedure for Sale and Disposition of Real Property, which includes a “Standard Method of Disposition” that begins at the Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee. As articulated in the procedure, the first decision by Council (after a favorable recommendation by the Committee) is whether or not to dispose of the surplus property and, subsequently, to determine the method of disposal (auction or sealed bid). The procedure also includes “Exceptions to Standard Method of Disposition,” which states as Exception D, “Donation of Land to Non-Profit Organizations: If, in the opinion of the Dover City Council, the donation of a parcel of excess land to a non-profit organization would be in the best interest of the City of Dover, Council then reserves unto itself the right to make such a donation.” Mr. Koenig advised members that the Central Delaware Habitat for Humanity had submitted an offer to purchase the subject properties. He stated that the sale of these properties to Habitat for Humanity is consistent with the goals of the City of Dover 2008 Comprehensive Plan, the City of Dover 2015-2019 Consolidated Plan, and the Downtown Development District designation, to foster home ownership for low- and moderate-income households, and also supports the City's goal and mandate to affirmatively further fair housing by allowing for location choices for low- and moderate-income households. Mr. Koenig reviewed the offers from Habitat for Humanity, explaining that if the offers were accepted, the City would need to write off a portion of the costs for demolition and the other charges, as follows: City’s 2015 Offer Lien Write-Off Address Assessed Land Price Amount Amount Value 16 S. Queen Street $ 5,000 $ 12,275 $ 7,275 $ 10,400 18 S. Queen Street $ 5,000 $ 6,920 $ 1,920 $ 10,400 24 N. New Street $ 5,000 $ 35,908.46 $ 30,908.46 $ 11,000 Mr. Koenig recommended negotiating a final agreement of sale and price for 16 and 18 South Queen Street with Habitat for Humanity. He stated that the final write-off amounts for these properties would be relatively low based on the initial offer letter from Habitat for Humanity; however, he would attempt to increase the final sale price to minimize the write-off amounts. Mr. Koenig noted that when the City had transferred property to Habitat for Humanity in the past, it was below the write-off amount and technically a donation to them through the loss process. By selling to Habitat for Humanity, the City would be ensured that the lots would be developed and occupied by homeowners, and he indicated that home ownership is important in creating strong communities. Mr. Koenig recommended disposing of the property at 24 North New Street by using the “Standard Method of Disposition” due to the significant potential write-off amount. He believed that there may be other buyers interested in this property, and the City could potentially recover additional costs and reduce the amount of the potential write-off by seeking bids.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 14 Mr. Koenig noted that 16 and 18 South Queen Street were adjacent to property owned by Habitat for Humanity; therefore, it made sense to dispose of the real estate to them. Staff recommended the following action: 1) determine that the property is excess property; 2) authorize the City Manager to negotiate a final sale price with Habitat for Humanity that minimizes the write-off amounts for 16 and 18 South Queen Street; and 3) authorize the City Manager to dispose of 24 North New Street using the “Standard Method of Disposition.” Mr. Sudler questioned the difference between the cost and sale amount that the City would lose. Responding, Mr. Koenig explained that for 16 South Queen Street the City’s lien amount was $12,275 and the offer price from Habitat for Humanity was $5,000; therefore, the maximum write off under current conditions would be $7,275. For 18 South Queen Street, the lien amount was $6,920 dollars and the offer from Habitat for Humanity was $5,000, so the maximum write off amount would be $1,920. He reiterated his recommendation to authorize him to negotiate an increased amount in an effort to reduce the City’s write-off amounts, realizing that the City would not be cash positive on this transaction. Referring to 24 North New Street, Mr. Koenig explained that the current offer from Habitat for Humanity would result in a write-off amount of $30,908.46, which he believed was too high to request Council to authorize. Instead, it was his opinion that the City should proceed with a sealed bid and accept the highest offer. In response to Mr. Sudler, Mr. Koenig explained that if the City were to accept the offer from Habitat for Humanity for 24 North New Street, the City would have to write off, or basically lose, $30,908.46. Mr. Shevock questioned whether the City should advertise for 16 and 18 South Queen Street to see if there are offers above Habitat for Humanity’s, since staff will advertise for 24 North New Street. Responding, Mr. Koenig stated that he did not recommend advertising for 16 and 18 South Queen Street. He explained that Habitat for Humanity owns 14 South Queen Street and, because these are small lots, their intention is to consolidate 14, 16, and 18 into two (2) lots with a house on each lot. Mr. Koenig stated that there is value in getting houses in this area quickly, and it would not be worth the amount of administrative time to advertise these properties. In response to Mr. Shevock, Mr. Koenig stated that the City always reserves the right to reject bids. He advised that the last time the City disposed of excess property in this manner, a minimum bid amount was set, which worked well. Mr. Sudler questioned if there were any Code violations on these properties. Responding, Mr. Koenig stated that there were no longer any Code violations because all of the structures had been removed, and the land should be vacant and free of trash. He noted that the City would write off any unpaid fines or vacant building fees remaining.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 15 Mr. Sudler inquired if the new owner would be responsible for existing violations. In response, Mr. Koenig explained that they would only have to mow the grass because the properties are vacant lots at this point. He stated that past violations will not transfer with the property, but the new owner would take over maintenance upon the transfer of the property. Mr. Anderson questioned whether the City would write off the lien against the property or reserve the right to continue to pursue other options, such as a civil suit, for collecting the debt. Responding, Mr. Koenig explained that once the City receives payment from Habitat for Humanity for the properties located at 16 and 18 South Queen Street, the unpaid balance would be removed from potential revenue and, for accounting purposes, would be written off. He stated that there would be no pursuit of legal action against the previous owner. Mr. Anderson stated that the process made sense for 16 and 18 South Queen Street because of the amount of staff time and legal fees that would be involved without a guarantee that the person would be found. However, he did not believe it made sense for 24 North New Street because the City would not be able to sell that property for an amount close to the lien, and questioned whether the City would consider selling the debt to a collection agency instead of writing it off. In response to Mr. Anderson, Mr. Koenig stated his belief that the City had never sold this type of debt to a collection agency. He advised that Mr. William Pepper, Deputy City Solicitor, had indicated that once the City owns the property, the true liens against the property are extinguished. Mr. Koenig stated that the City does not have a legal measure to go back and pursue a lawsuit. Since the owner forfeited the property and the City took title to it, the City basically agreed to forgive the prior property owner the amount. Mr. Shevock moved to recommend: 1) declaring properties located at 16 South Queen Street, 18 South Queen Street, and 24 North New Street as excess property; 2) authorizing the City Manager to negotiate a final sale price with Habitat for Humanity that minimizes the write-off amounts for 16 and 18 South Queen Street; and 3) authorizing the City Manager to dispose of 24 North New Street using the “Standard Method of Disposition,” as recommended by staff. The motion was seconded by Mr. Cole. Responding to Mr. Sudler, Mr. Koenig explained that the “Standard Method of Disposition” would be through sealed bid. In response to Mr. Sudler, Mr. Hare confirmed that through the sealed bid process, someone would purchase the property, and the intent was to try to get more than $5,000 for it. The Committee recommended: 1) declaring properties located at 16 South Queen Street, 18 South Queen Street, and 24 North New Street as excess property; 2) authorizing the City Manager to negotiate a final sale price with Habitat for

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 16 Humanity that minimizes the write-off amounts for 16 and 18 South Queen Street; and 3) authorizing the City Manager to dispose of 24 North New Street using the “Standard Method of Disposition. By consent agenda, Mr. Neil moved for approval of the Committee’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Hutchison and carried by a unanimous roll call vote. Discussion - Fiscal Year 2015 Audit Program Mrs. Donna Mitchell, Controller/Treasurer, and Mr. William Seymour, SB & Company, LLC, reviewed a presentation entitled “Auditor’s Responsibility for Communicating with Audit Committee.” In regard to the Auditor’s Responsibility - Page 4, Mr. Seymour advised members that, under generally accepted auditing standards, there is a requirement to communicate with those charged with governance and this can occur in various forms, such as a meeting or letters. He advised members that SB & Company would bring items of significance to their attention as they are discovered. Mr. Seymour stated that the audit responsibilities of SB & Company and of management would be outlined in an engagement letter. He indicated that field work would begin in a few weeks and would include a preliminary review of the processes and controls that underlie the financial reporting process and the compliance process for the single audit. A secondary process would take place after year-end to validate on a scope basis the actual numbers within the financial statements. At the end of the audit, the results would be summarized, including whether or not significant deficiencies or material weaknesses were found. Mr. Seymour stated that his firm would effectively evaluate whether management would be able to produce an accurate set of financial statements if the financial auditor were removed from the process, and whether the system is designed to provide reliable data. He indicated that the number one (1) potential issue would be a finding of lots of journal entries. Mr. Seymour noted that, during an audit, sometimes numbers reported by management are found to be incorrect, such as discrepancies between the cash balance reported by management and the balance obtained by the auditor; at other times there may discrepancies in how items are presented within the statement, such as assets that are capitalized in one (1) place and expended elsewhere. Mr. Seymour stated that this presentation related specifically to the June 30, 2015 audit and was requested by Mrs. Mitchell so that new members would have this information prior to receiving the audit results. He advised members that SB & Company was available to answer any questions they may have. Mrs. Mitchell advised members that the Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee serves as the City’s audit committee. She indicated that the calendar provided spelled out the tasks to be performed during the audit period. Mrs. Mitchell noted that there was a goal to have the audit done by November 30th, rather than

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 17 December 31st as had been done in the past. She informed members that new pension accounting standards were implemented both last year and this year, which would result in a larger pension liability for unfunded pensions on the financial statements. The Committee recommended acceptance of the Fiscal Year 2015 Audit Program. By consent agenda, Mr. Neil moved for approval of the Committee’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Hutchison and carried by a unanimous roll call vote. By consent agenda, Mr. Neil moved for acceptance of the Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee Report, seconded by Mr. Hutchison and carried by a unanimous roll call vote. BOARD OF ASSESSMENT APPEALS EXEMPTION REPORT - MAY 28 AND JUNE 2, 2015 The Board of Assessment Appeals met on May 28 and June 2, 2015, with Chairman Garfinkel presiding. EXEMPTIONS House of Pride Inc. Locations: 110 S. New Street & 106 S. New Street RECOMMENDED ACTION: Recommend that the request for exemption be reviewed. BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS An exemption application was submitted to the Assessor’s Office. 110 S. New Street had been listed as an exempt property from July 2002 until July 2012. 106 S. New Street had been listed as an exempt property from July 2002 until July 2011. The exemptions were revoked because the Conditional Use permits were revoked; therefore the properties did not meet the qualifications for an exempt status with the City of Dover. Since the properties did not have the proper permits, they were no longer being used for the intended purpose of the exemption. These are vacant pieces of land.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 18 Exemption Request 106 S New St - $13,100 110 S New Street $11,600 Mr. Marion Lott, Executive Director and Mary Beth Johnson, Property Manager were present for the hearing. City Assessor, Cheryl Bundek went over the packet, that included paperwork provided by the appellant. She also suggested that the board look at the two parcels of land first and then go over the properties with buildings. The two parcels of land were 106 S. New Street and 110 S. New St. Mr. Lott told the board that his organization owes demolition fees and taxes on these two properties. He explained that the organization is looking into donating those two parcels of land to the Central Delaware Habitat for Humanity. Mr. Lott was wondering if the City would be able to help his organization and work on an agreement between the City and the House of Pride. He explained that his organization does not have the funds to pay the outstanding fees and taxes. Mrs. Ann Marie Townsend explained that the House of Pride would have to come to an agreement with the Central Delaware Habitat for Humanity and then present the city with this agreement. It would be up to the City Council to forgive the fees and taxes on those properties because they were donated to the Habitat for Humanity. She explained that this should be handled by City Council and would not pertain to the Board of Assessments Appeals. The Assessor pointed out, after a brief discussion, that the board could only make a decision on whether these two properties should be exempt from taxes up until they are donated to the Central Delaware Habitat for Humanity, as they are currently being utilized. Chairman Garfinkel explained that in his opinion these two properties should stay as taxable properties, because they are vacant lots. Chairman Garfinkel made the motion to deny the request for exemption for 106 S New Street and 110 S New Street, which was seconded by Mr. Stonesifer. Motion carried: 3-0

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 19 The Board recommended denying the request for exemption for 106 S New Street and 110 S New Street. Locations: Exempt Request: 16 N. New St. $54,600 29 S. New St. $82,800 20 N. New St. $89,900 38 S. New St. $80,500 37 S. New St. $119,200 115 S. New St. $117,900 105 S. New St. $72,200 102 S. New St. $60,900 55 S. New St. $60,900 45 S. New St. $77,700 BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS An exemption application was submitted to the Assessor’s Office. These properties, accept for 115 S New Street, which had never had the exempt status, were listed as exempt properties from July 2002 until October 2012. The exemptions were revoked because the Conditional Use permits were revoked; therefore the properties did not meet the qualifications for an exempt status with the City of Dover. Since the properties did not have the proper permits, they were no longer being used for the intended purpose of the exemption. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Recommend that the request for exemption be reviewed. Chairman Garfinkel asked Mr. Lott to comment on the other properties mentioned in the exempt requests. Mr. Lott handed out a list of all the properties the organization owns, which also lists the number of people living in each of the properties. He explained that the organization is a Non-Profit organization and that they are not making any money on any of these properties. The rent money generated is utilized to pay the mortgages and utilities. The organization should take in $7,400 a month, but because not all of their renters are able to pay the rent on monthly basis, they often fall short. Mr. Lott also mentioned that the city has been offering assistance to homeowners in that area and that The House of Pride has put in three applications for assistance, which had all been declined.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 20 Mr. Lott explained that his organization would benefit if these properties would be exempt from property taxes. He explained that his organization keeps the homeless off of the streets and provides a stable home for the children, he asked for the board’s help. Ann Marie Townsend, City Planning Director, went over past issues the city had with the House of Pride such as building code, fire code and zoning issues, etc. In 2008 the House of Pride applied for conditional use permits to have the house used as residential recovery and transitional housing. The organization did not keep up with the conditional use agreement, which lead to the revocation of the permit by the Planning Commission in 2012. She refers to a letter from Sandra Dean, who was the organizations attorney at that time, acknowledging that the organization no longer rents to people within the recovery program and that these properties should be taxed. Mrs. Townsend also said that 115 S. New St. has never been a part of that program and has always been a taxable property. She questioned the number of 11 people living on one property. To her knowledge these properties where supposed to be one family homes or two unit apartments. She points out that on the information sheet provided, at the beginning of the hearing, 102 S. New Street is listed as occupying 5 adults and 1 child, she questioned that the occupancy may not be up to code. This made her questioned whether these properties are rentals or if there is even a program for those people that live there. Mr. Lott explained that the organization used to have numerous individuals in recovery programs, who now are renting apartments. Those individual are still attending those programs and the organization makes sure they continue to participate. Mr. Lott told the board that the occupants have to continue with their programs in order to be able to live there. Mr. Lott went on to answer Mrs. Townsends question about 102 S. New St. He said the renter’s two older children have moved back in, which is why there are so many people living at the property. Mr. William W. Pepper Sr. Esq. Deputy City Solicitor commented that while the mission of the House of Pride does has a very beneficial purpose, he has not heard anything, during the meeting, that would change the circumstance or why they should now be exempt. He pointed at the letter the City received from Sandra Dean, attorney for the House of Pride, in which it stated that the organization understands that all properties are subject to property tax.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 21 Chairman Garfinkel asked if 115 S New Street should not have been on the exempt request list. Mrs. Townsend explained that this property had always been a rental property and had never been part of the recovery program. Chairman Garfinkel asked if Mr. Lott has a license to engage in drug, alcohol and substance abuse services. Mr. Lott replied that he does not have a license and that the organization is not offering such services, their purpose is to make sure that their renters continue with the programs they are in. Todd Stonesifer explains that while the services the House of Pride offers are commendable, the board cannot change the rules. Mr. Stonesifer made the motion to deny the exempt request which was second by Mr. Chairman Garfinkel opened up for discussion at which time Mr. Stonesifer suggested that the organization should get their status back. Chairman Garfinkel also said, that looking at the certificate of operation for the House of Pride, the purpose should be for substance abuse and not what they are doing now. If they do not have the proper licensing than they are not engaging in the purpose of the organization. In his opinion nothing has changed since the exempt status has been revoked. Motion passed 3-0 Mrs. Bundek informed the appellant, that the City Council was the final decision and that a certified letter with the date of the Council Hearing would be mailed to them. The Board recommended denying the exemption request. During the Regular City Council Meeting held on June 22, 2015, Mrs. Cheryl Bundek, Tax Assessor, advised members that Item #6A, Board of Assessment Appeals Exemption Report - May 28 and June 2, 2015, House of Pride, Inc. was not included on Council’s Consent Agenda due to the unfavorable recommendation from the Board of Assessment Appeals. The Board denied the request for exemption for Items A-1 and A-2, for the properties at 110 South New Street and 106 South New Street, because they were vacant lots. Items A-3 through A-12, pertaining to the properties at 16 North New Street, 29 South New Street, 20 North New Street, 38 South New Street, 37 South New Street, 115 South New Street, 105 South New Street, 102 South New Street, 55 South New Street, and 45 South New Street, were denied by the Board because they did not possess the proper licensing and were not engaging in the organization’s purpose. Staff recommended that City Council approve the recommendation of the Board to deny the exemption request.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 22 Responding to Mr. Sudler in regard to the main requirement that properties A-3 through A-12 did not meet, Mrs. Bundek explained that the owners did not have the proper licensing to engage in the House of Pride organization activities, including licensing for alcohol and drug abuse treatment. Ms. Mary-Beth Johnson, House of Pride, stated that she was standing in for Apostle Lott, who was on a mission to Mississippi. She stated that she had volunteered with the House of Pride for five (5) years and the only licensing she had seen was a Certificate of Incorporation. She expressed appreciation for the Tax Assessor’s Office meeting with them. Ms. Johnson stated that the House of Pride was still helping the community, but not in the same capacity that former House of Pride Director Marian Harris had done. She explained that there was no longer a treatment program and they were only providing low-income housing. Ms. Johnson stated that the main focus of the House of Pride was to get the properties back to the way that the City and the House of Pride expected them to be. When they get the properties up to par, they would focus on the men and women of the community. Ms. Johnson assured members that they were not trying to disregard these individuals; however, they need to know that their houses are in the condition that they should be in. Noting that the vacant lots were in a different category than properties providing services, Mr. Anderson questioned if, to Ms. Johnson’s knowledge, there had been a requirement for drug and alcohol rehabilitation licenses. Responding, Ms. Johnson stated that she was unaware of such a requirement since the House of Pride is not a treatment facility. She stated that Ms. Marian Harris had always said that her business was one of a kind. Ms. Johnson stated that, as a volunteer, she had been working hard on the houses and did not get into the nuts and bolts of the program. She explained that the House of Pride had a meeting scheduled with the Central Delaware Habitat for Humanity to offer these lots to them as a donation. In response to Mr. Anderson, Ms. Johnson confirmed that House of Pride is a non-profit organization that does a lot of outreach. She stated that everything is either donated or comes out of her pocket. Responding to Mr. Anderson, Ms. Johnson confirmed that House of Pride was not making any profits from the rentals and was subsidizing them and trying to give people a second chance. She stated that sometimes this works and sometimes it does not. Ms. Johnson advised members that House of Pride was now struggling. She indicated that the people who come to them are very much in need. House of Pride takes the risk of housing a lot of different people, including single mothers, people who have graduated from the program and stayed clean, and handicapped couples. Ms. Johnson explained that the House of Pride wants some people to stay for the long haul and expressed her understanding that the City does not want the majority of those to be rental properties. For this reason, the House of Pride wants to get the houses to the satisfaction of the City and not make them rentals but put them back into a program at some point in the future. In response to Mr. Anderson regarding what the impact would be if the House of Pride were to lose their appeal, Ms. Johnson stated that another deficit would be added to what they were already going through, and they were struggling. She explained that Ms. Harris had been gone for almost two (2) years and a lot of funding had closed its doors as she was leaving. Ms. Johnson stated that they only receive one (1) grant and everything else is basically from pulling personal monies together. Responding to Mr. Sudler in regard to whether the City had ever had any licenses on file for this program, Mrs. Ann Marie Townshend, Director of Planning and Community Development, stated that a conditional use permit was in place at one time but was revoked because of non-compliance

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 23 with the conditions. She indicated that the City does not license substance abuse providers. Mrs. Townshend stated that she had been present at the hearing when it was stated by one (1) of the members that the organization’s charter, which gives them non-profit status, specifically mentions substance abuse and recovery. It was the decision of the Board that if House of Pride was not performing these function listed in their charter, they should not have the tax exemption. Mr. Sudler stated his understanding that the House of Pride’s conditional use consisted of having programs for alcohol and drug abuse and questioned which conditional use they did not meet. Responding, Mrs. Townshend stated that the conditional use was required because House of Pride was running an unlicensed substance abuse program in their houses in a residential zone and was not meeting codes, explaining that this use was not permitted in a residential zone. She indicated that House of Pride went through the conditional use process to be considered as a philanthropic use within a residential zone. Mrs. Townshend explained that they had this designation for a number of years and there were repeated issues with fire code and property maintenance code violations. This matter went to the Planning Commission and the conditional use was then revoked. Mr. Neil questioned if the homes were up to code and, if not, if there was a possibility of a buyer being able to bring them up to code. Mrs. Townshend stated that all of the homes were not occupied. Ms. Johnson stated that 20 North New Street was unoccupied and had been on the market for well over a year. A few people had looked at it, but she stated her opinion that this property was not savable and, more than likely, would be demolished. She stated that criminals ransacked 45 South New Street after work had been done while she was on vacation, so they were behind on this property again. One additional property, 37 South New Street, was empty and Ms. Johnson estimated that this would be completed within a month. The major things that the City had requested were completed by special contractors and the beautification was being finished. Ms. Johnson stated that House of Pride offers after care, explaining that a gentleman who came to the organization for help is a renter there and now volunteers full-time with the organization. She stated that people like this come back to serve the community, and the organization is a circle that helps people out and tries to put them back in the community as more productive people. There being no one else present wishing to speak, Council President Slavin declared the public hearing closed. Mr. Hutchison moved to accept the recommendations of the Board of Assessment Appeals to deny the request for exemption for Items A-1through A-12 regarding properties owned by House of Pride. The motion was seconded by Mr. Neil. Mr. Anderson expressed concern regarding the Board’s recommendation, stating his opinion that there should be a distinction between the vacant lots and allowing the exemption, which had existed for decades, for the House of Pride to continue to do its work and after care. Mr. Anderson felt that the Board was getting into micro managing a non-profit and trying to tell it how its job is done. He did not believe that this was the job of the Board. He stated that Council had dealt with and overturned this in the past and he felt this was a mistake. Mr. Anderson stated that House of Pride was doing charitable work that was consistent with after care to keep people clean and sober and broader work in helping others who are handicapped with longer-term housing needs. He felt that

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 24 the City had asked a lot of House of Pride over the last couple of years, including putting in a lot of money to upgrade the properties. Mr. Anderson reminded those members who were present that there had previously been a concern that the properties were deteriorating and needed to be taken care of, and they had done everything the City had asked and had almost completed that process. He felt that putting more bills on House of Pride before everything is complete would hinder what the City was trying to do to reclaim New Street and make these properties look good, be up to code, and have the right people in them to build up the neighborhood. Mr. Anderson felt that the proposed action would be counterproductive to those ends. Mr. Sudler inquired if Ms. Johnson foresaw the program continuing with the initial focus of Ms. Harris’ vision within the next three (3) months. Responding, Ms. Johnson stated that this might occur within six (6) months, but she could not guarantee three (3) months. She confirmed that the organization had been working on a plan of action. Ms. Johnson apologized for Apostle Lott’s absence, noting that she is basically the property manager and that he was more equipped to answer than she was. Mr. Sudler questioned if in six (6) months the House of Pride would be able to meet the conditional use and be back to its original concept plan of functioning and serving the community in their past capacity. Ms. Johnson confirmed that they would. Ms. Johnson questioned if this would apply to just the properties that house program individuals or all of the houses. Responding, Mrs. Townshend stated that it would apply to all of the houses since the zone is a single-family residential zone and other uses would not be permitted in the zone. She stated that the City was able to categorize it for a conditional use as a philanthropic function. Mrs. Townshend stated that, at this point, the only approved use on any of the properties was a single-family residential use. Ms. Johnson responded that this was exactly the population that House of Pride was serving, noting that the majority of the properties were apartments with families in them and there were only one (1) or two (2) with single people, noting that single males live in two (2) of the apartments, and there are four (4) individuals living in one (1) house. None of them are relatives, although up to five (5) relatives are allowed. She stated that these were all after care people and, by the end of the current week, three (3) of them would be moving on. Mr. Lewis questioned if all of the properties were up to safety code. Responding, Mrs. Townshend stated that 45 South New Street had been declared dangerous by City Council. A building permit had been issued. Noting that Ms. Johnson mentioned that House of Pride had nearly finished their repairs, Mrs. Townshend stated that the organization had not called inspections staff for inspections; therefore, any repairs made were not inspected. She reiterated that 20 North New Street was vacant. Mrs. Townshend stated her understanding that renovations were underway for 37 South New Street, but the owners had not called the City for inspections. She stated that the challenge with these properties had been that when there was code compliance, it had been marginal and short lived, which was part of the reasons why staff had been back several times to the Planning Commission regarding the conditional use and why several properties had been brought forward as dangerous buildings over the years.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 25 Responding to Mr. Lewis, Mrs. Townshend confirmed that these properties were pending, stating that some were occupied and had passed more recent inspections, and others were unoccupied and had not had the inspections necessary to grant them occupancy. Mr. Neil stated his assumption that no taxes were being paid on these properties because House of Pride was a 501(c)(3) organization. In response, Mrs. Townshend stated that, in 2012, the City received a letter from Ms. Sandra Dean, who was House of Pride’s attorney at that time, stating that they were no longer going to be providing the services for which they had a conditional use, and that they understood that these properties were no longer tax exempt. Since that point in time, they had been sent a property tax bill annually, which they had not been paying. Mr. Scott Koenig, City Manager, stated that to his knowledge, House of Pride was delinquent. It was his belief that a demolition lien had been added to the tax rolls for at least one (1) of the properties. He was not aware of any significant progress made to remedy the delinquent taxes on a majority of the properties. Ms. Johnson stated that she would bring inspection reports to Mrs. Townshend, noting that individuals had reinspected the footing at 45 South New Street. Mrs. Townshend stated that framing and drywall had been done and the framing was not inspected before it was enclosed. Responding, Ms. Johnson stated that an individual had come during the previous week and had asked that the floorboards be pulled so he could look at it, and this was done. She noted that she would let him come out and look at it again. Ms. Johnson advised members that they came out and looked at the footing at 37 South New Street and the floors had not been closed up yet and she indicated that she would bring these reports in. Ms. Johnson stated that House of Pride paid taxes this year for the previous year. She confirmed that the demolition did go towards the lien. Mr. Slavin reopened the public hearing. Responding to Mr. Lewis in regard to the reason taxes had not been paid, Ms. Johnson stated that this was due to lack of funds. Noting that the House of Pride had not paid taxes for this year, Mr. Sudler inquired if they were current on taxes for previous years. Responding, Ms. Johnson stated they owed just for the current year. Mr. Koenig noted that House of Pride also owed for whatever demolition liens had been added to the tax roll. Ms. Johnson corrected her previous statement, stating that taxes had been paid for rental properties and payments were behind for properties not being rented or used. In total for all units, House of Pride was two (2) years behind. Council President Slavin declared the hearing closed, noting that a motion had been made by Councilman Hutchison and seconded by Councilman Neil to accept the Board’s recommendation for denial of the request for exemption. Mr. Anderson stated that there had been a market change with the change in management and that demolitions were occurring previously. He noted that there had been marked change and good progress over the last year.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 26 The motion to accept the recommendations of the Board of Assessment Appeals to deny the request for exemption for Items A-1through A-12 - House of Pride, was carried by a vote of eight (8) yes (Sudler, Neil, Lewis, Cole, Hosfelt, Hare, Hutchison, and Slavin) and one (1) no (Anderson). Central Delaware Habitat for Humanity Locations: Exempt Request: 20 S Kirkwood St. $42,300 28 S Kirkwood St. $50,600 30 S Kirkwood St. $35,500 40 S Kirkwood St. $74,900 138 Cherry St. $38,200 117 S Queen St. $58,300 29 N Kirkwood St. $0 (already exempt) –City owned) 223 W Division St. $117,200 BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS An exemption request for the above referenced properties was submitted to the Assessor’s Office. These properties are being renovated for low-income families to provide an affordable mortgage. Once these properties are complete and the ownership is transferred, they will be added back to the tax rolls. (As a supplemental billing) RECOMMENDED ACTION: Recommend that the request for exemption be approved. Mrs. Tice, Executive Director was present for the meeting. She went over Central Delaware Habitat for Humanities’ mission, which is to bring families together to build affordable homes in the community. Mrs. Tice told the board that there are currently 17 Habitat homeowners in Dover, 40 throughout Kent County and that the organization is working back in Dover on a number of properties. She went on to tell the board that the Central Delaware Habitat for Humanity had been awarded $672,000 back in January by the Strong Neighborhood Housing Fund. With that fund they are planning to buy, renovate or demolish properties within a 20 block radius of Downtown Dover. The organization is looking to increase the homeownership in this area, which primarily had been rental properties. She explained that the organization is targeting low-income families who are able to pay a mortgage. The homes are built with the help of volunteers and the aspects of the organization.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 27 Mrs. Tice told the board that construction will begin in June on the four properties located on Kirkwood Street. She went on to explain that 138 Cherry Street is currently in their Land Bank, construction will start sometime in 2016. 117 S. Queen Street is a vacant home and was donated to the organization and is scheduled for demolition, new construction is also scheduled for 2016. 29 N. Kirkwood was purchased from the City, which is also scheduled for construction in 2016. Mrs. Tice went on to talk about 223 W Division Street, which used to be an old shoe store. She told the board that the building was donated to their organization by a bank. She also mentioned that the organization does not yet know how to utilize that building. One of the options would be to use the building as an office building. Mrs. Bundek mentioned that the City has not received the deed for 223 W. Division Street. Mrs. Tice offered to provide the Assessor’s Office with a copy of the deed. Board Member Welsh made the motion to accept the request for exemption for all of the properties, which was seconded by Board Member Stonesifer. Motion passed 3-0 Chairman Garfinkel raised the question about 223 W Division St., he was wondering if this property would fall under the scope of the organization, since this is a commercial property. Mrs. Tice explained that when a Bank donates a property to a non-profit organization, the building should be used as community development, which is why the organization is looking to use the building as an outreach or a satellite office for the organization. She assured the Board Members that it is not the intent of the organization to use this property for investment purposes and offered to keep the City updated about the future use of the building. Chairman Garfinkel requested to amend the motion, to grant the exemption for all of the properties except for 223 W. Division Street, which will be exempted for one year only, to be revisited once the organization knows what the use will be. Motion carried 3-0 Mrs. Bundek informed the appellant, that the City Council was the final decision and that a certified letter with the date of the Council Hearing would be mailed to her. The Board recommended granting the exemption for all of the properties except for 223 W. Division Street, which will be exempted for one (1) year only, to be revisited once the organization knows what the use will be.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 28 By consent agenda, Mr. Neil moved for approval of the Board’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Hutchison and carried by a unanimous roll call vote. Emerald Pointe Maintenance Corp. Locations: Open Spaces BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS These parcels fall under State Statute 9 Del. C. §8110 Civic organizations owning parkland. EXEMPTION REQUEST ED05-067.01-02-14.00 $ 2,600 ED05-067.01-01-98.00 $ 2,800 ED05-067.01-01-96.00 $10,300 ED05-067.01-02-13.00 $ 3,500 ED05-067.01-01-97.00 $29,200 ED05-067.01-01-99.00 $10,900 $ 59,300 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Recommend that the request for exemption be approved. Mrs. Murphy, community Manager with Legum & Norman, employed by Emerald Pointe Maintenance Corp. as their management firm was present for representation. Mrs. Murphy told the board that the Emerald Point Maintenance Corp. has applied for Exemption with the City of Dover. She also mentioned that they are already exempt with Kent County. Chairman Garfinkel asked if these properties were open spaces and if they will remain that way. Mrs. Murphy assured that they are open spaces and that there will be no future changes to those properties. Mr. Burns asked if these spaces have been recorded as open spaces, which was confirmed by Mrs. Murphy. Board Member Burns made the motion to accept the request for exemption, which was seconded by Board Member Welsh. Motion carried 3-0

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 29 Mrs. Bundek informed Ms. Murphy that the City Council was the final decision and that a certified letter with the date of the Council Hearing would be mailed to her. The Board recommended accepting the request for exemption. By consent agenda, Mr. Neil moved for approval of the Board’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Hutchison and carried by a unanimous roll call vote. Village of Westover HOA, Inc. Location: Open Spaces. BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS These parcels fall under State Statute 9 Del. C. §8110 Civic organizations owning parkland. EXEMPTION REQUEST ED05-076.09-03-70.00 $ 50,900 ED05-076.09-03-71.00 132,300 $183,200 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Recommend that the request for exemption be approved. Nobody was present to represent the Village of Westover HOA, Inc. Chairman Garfinkel asked the Assessor to comment on the request, as there was no representative for Village of Westover HOA present. Mrs. Bundek asked the petition be approved as it falls under Delaware State Code 9 Del. C. §8110 for civic organizations owning park land. She pointed out that the board just heard and approved the exempt request for the Emerald Pointe Maintenance Corp., which was for open spaces as well. She assured the board that these spaces too have been recorded as open spaces and cannot be used for anything else. Board Member Welsh made the motion to accept the Assessor’s recommendation to approve the exempt request, which was seconded by Board Member Burns. Motion carried 3-0 Mrs. Bundek informed the board, that the City Council was the final decision and that a certified letter with the date of the Council Hearing would be mailed to the HOA.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 30 The Board recommended acceptance of the Assessor’s recommendation to approve the exemption request. By consent agenda, Mr. Neil moved for approval of the Board’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Hutchison and carried by a unanimous roll call vote. Mr. Hare moved for acceptance of the Board of Assessment Appeals report, seconded by Mr. Hosfelt and unanimously carried. AUTHORIZATION TO EXECUTE AGREEMENT TO PERFORM A COMPREHENSIVE ANALYSIS OF POLICE, FIRE AND EMS SERVICES FOR THE CITY OF DOVER Mr. Scott Koenig, City Manager, advised members that earlier this year, during a discussion of additional officers for the Dover Police Department, the City Manager’s Office sought assistance from the Center for Public Safety Management, LLC (CPSM) with respect to various public safety services in an effort to understand and analyze the needs of the City of Dover. Mr. Koenig explained that CPSM is the exclusive provider of public safety technical assistance for the International City/County Management Association (ICMA), noting that he and the Assistant City Manager are members of ICMA. Mr. Koenig stated that a proposal was received from CPSM to perform an analysis of the major functions and outcomes of the Department related to public safety, with a primary focus on the Police Department. He indicated that the comprehensive analysis would also include examining fire and Emergency Medical Services (EMS), including comprehensive data analysis; a review of governance and administration of these services; organizational behavior and management processes; financial resources including operating and capital resources; programs including fire suppression, EMS, fire prevention, public education, investigation, technical rescue, hazardous materials, emergency management, and other delivery programs; risk management and the all-hazards approach to community protection; and the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) accreditation of benefit analysis. Mr. Koenig explained that this would be a third-party analysis performed by a team of qualified subject matter experts specifically designed to give a local government a thorough and unbiased analysis of the emergency services within their community. Based on the connection with ICMA and the unique services provided under the proposal, Mr. Koenig recommended that this proposal be authorized as a sole source procurement, and that staff be authorized to begin work on this, shortly after July 1, 2015. The amount budgeted in the FY 16 budget for this service was $100,000. If Council gave authorization tonight, staff would be prepared to execute an agreement upon final adoption of the FY 16 budget, and it was expected that work would be underway in July, with a project estimated completion time of 105 to 135 days after execution of the agreement. Staff recommended authorizing the City Manager to execute an agreement with the Center for Public Safety Management, LLC to perform a comprehensive analysis of police, fire and EMS services for the City of Dover. This authorization is contingent upon the adoption of the FY-2016 City of Dover operating budget. The execution of the agreement will be finalized after July 1, 2015. Mr. Lewis questioned if there were a more economical way of conducting the analysis than paying $100,000. Responding, Mr. Koenig stated his opinion of the need to secure the services of an unbiased expert. He explained that he had held discussions with CPSM and Police Chief

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 31 Paul Bernat had seen presentations by one (1) of CPSM’s experts. Although Chief Bernat was not present at the Council meeting, Mr. Koenig stated that he and the Chief had discussed this as part of the budget presentation and they felt, for the benefit of the community, that an independent third party should look at this. Mr. Koenig stated his belief that it would not be in the City's best interest to seek another option. Mr. Lewis asked if a establishing a committee with local experts would be more cost effective. Mr. Koenig did not feel that a committee of local experts could provide a product within 105-135 days. Mr. Lewis questioned if Mr. Koenig was saying that local experts did not have the expertise. Responding, Mr. Koenig stated that he was asked to prepare a proposal, and this was the proposal he was bringing forth because he believed it to be unbiased in all aspects. Mr. Lewis stated his opinion that $100,000 for this analysis was high when the City was in a tight budget. Mr. Anderson questioned if Mr. Koenig had gotten recommendations from other municipalities who had used this service to study their public safety. Responding, Mr. Koenig stated that he had not talked directly to the listed entities; however, the City of Annapolis had used this company to do a review of certain services and those reviews were part of the presentations that the CPSM includes in their workshops and webinars. It was his belief that CPSM’s work product was available through the various cities that they had done business with. Mr. Hare moved to suspend the rules to allow Fire Chief Mark Hall to speak. The motion was seconded by Mr. Sudler and unanimously carried. Chief Hall stated that he was caught off guard as he received a phone call early this morning informing him that this item was put on the agenda and asked, as Fire Chief, that Mr. Koenig inform him what the ultimate plan was in reference to the Fire Department. Mr. Koenig stated that there was no predetermined plan going into this and suggested that the Fire Department review some of the discussions held by the Ad Hoc Financial Advisory and Operational Committee, as well as various discussions with the Fire Department, including whether the City can economize dispatching services, deliver services cheaper, and partner with other available means. Mr. Koenig indicated that this proposal was not in any way intended to be disrespectful to the Department but was about improving efficiencies and work flow, as well as reducing cost if possible, which is exactly what Council had requested on many occasions. Chief Hall inquired if this would be a comprehensive review of the Fire Department that would focus on the dispatch center, which includes City employees. Responding, Mr. Koenig stated that the review would also look at apparatus, financing, calls, and deployment strategies. He indicated that this was all included in the proposal provided by CPSM.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 32 On behalf of the Dover Fire Department, Robbins Hose Company, and the Fire Chief, Chief Hall stated that he did not agree with this review. He stated that he had been against the Ad Hoc Financial and Operational Advisory Committee; however, he was serving as the Assistant Chief at that time. He stated that the Committee’s review was similar to this; however, it did not cost $100,000. He asked that members take into consideration that the Fire Department is volunteer. Responding to Mr. Sudler regarding what Chief Hall thought could be done and if this should include another ad hoc committee, Chief Hall stated that no one had contacted him and asked him any questions, which would be one (1) option. Other than going through an ad hoc committee, which had already been done, he had no additional suggestions. Mr. Lewis inquired what Chief Hall would think about creating a committee that would consist of the experts in the Fire Department and members of the community, including people with financial backgrounds. Responding, Chief Hall stated that he thought this would be an option. Mr. Hare indicated that the City of Annapolis indicated that CPSM was very professional and unbiased and that they review programs from a neutral point of view. He stated that the City of Annapolis was very pleased overall. Mr. Hare stated that the Council had directed Mr. Koenig to go forward with a review. He reiterated that this would be a totally unbiased review and the Police Chief was okay with it. Mr. Hare stated the need for an unbiased opinion rather than a review by local people so that there would be a fresh set of eyes without opinions before they get here. Mr. Hosfelt questioned if this review would be favorable to the City as well as the unions and expressed concern in regard to the unions. Responding, Mr. Koenig stated that the experts involved understand that a number of cities operate in a police and fire union operated environment, so they are aware of the associated challenge. He indicated that this would be more about workload application, including whether the City has the appropriate units, whether they are appropriately staffed based on national reviews, etc. It would also look at how calls come in and are analyzed and distributed. Mr. Koenig stated that, in his opinion, this would be a more technically driven discussion than a Bartell formula review and would be data driven. He advised members that it may mean that schedules would be modified, but it is understood that those types of recommendations have to go through a review process with the individual agencies. Mr. Koenig assured members that the consultant would not come in saying, “You have to do this,” but would say, “Here is a series of recommendations that will improve your service delivery.” Noting that social media had been a huge improvement, in some cases to law enforcement, Mr. Koenig stated that there may be things in this area that should be considered and CPSM may make recommendations related to nationwide agencies or standards, such as civilianizing certain positions so that an officer could be redeployed to an actual position. Mr. Lewis questioned if this was already being done. Responding, Mr. Koenig stated that he did not know the answer to that, because this was up to the Chief of Police and his staff . Mr. Koenig stated that Chief Bernat had heard someone speak on this matter at a law enforcement seminar and understood the potential impact to the Police Department. Mr. Koenig stated that when Council authorized ten additional officers, this was a minimum salary base line of $0.5M, not including the load for benefits, overtime, uniforms, and support for those officers. Mr. Koenig stated that the cost

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 33 of the study would be $100,000, approximately $65,000 to $70,000 of which would relate to the Police Department. He felt that it would be prudent for the City to spend this amount to ensure getting the best out of the $0.5M that had been authorized. Mr. Hare reminded members that the report would be given to the City Manager and Council, who would decide if they wished to implement anything in it. The report would provide information from experts that would help Council during budget time, noting that you can never have enough information. Mr. Hutchison reminded members that this Council and the former Council had an outstanding track record on supporting the Police and Fire Departments and that the City has outstanding Fire and Police Departments. He felt it was Council’s job to make sure they are doing the right things to prepare for the future. Having been part of the Police Department for 25 years, Mr. Hutchison felt the study was needed since the world had changed and the City must also be able to do so. He felt it would be helpful to have a team of experts come in from the outside to analyze the City and come back with a recommendation. Although Council would not have to take their recommendations, Mr. Hutchison felt that Council had an obligation to the citizens to at least look at them. Mr. Sudler asked if Mr. Koenig believed that the City would receive a $100,000 return on this $100,000 investment. Responding, Mr. Koenig stated that if a recommendation was provided that saved the City $20,000 per year, by spending $100,000 in FY 16, this cost would be recovered within five (5) years. Mr. Anderson moved to accept staff’s recommendation to authorize the City Manager to execute an agreement with the Center for Public Safety Management, LLC to perform a comprehensive analysis of police, fire, and EMS services for the City of Dover, with authorization to be contingent upon the FY 2016 City of Dover operating budget and with the execution of this agreement to be finalized after July 1, 2015. The motion was seconded by Mr. Sudler. Mr. Anderson stated that he understood and shared some skepticism in this matter; however, he stated that he favored the review because the City Manager had been saying for the last three (3) years that certain areas needed to be examined and internal politics did not seem to allow for experts to be obtained who were not on one side or the other. Mr. Anderson noted that some of these matters deal with $700,000 per year. He indicated that he was willing to let the City Manager manage, as this is what he is paid to do, and if all factors were equal and he must flip a coin, he would flip it to that side. The motion to accept staff’s recommendation to authorize the City Manager to execute an agreement with the Center for Public Safety Management, LLC to perform a comprehensive analysis of police, fire, and EMS services for the City of Dover, with authorization to be contingent upon the FY 2016 City of Dover operating budget and with the execution of this agreement to be finalized after July 1, 2015, was carried by a roll call vote of eight (8) yes (Anderson, Sudler, Neil, Lewis, Cole, Hosfelt, Hare, Hutchison, and Slavin) and one (1) no (Lewis).

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 34 REAPPOINTMENTS RECOMMENDED BY MAYOR CHRISTIANSEN - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT - THREE (3) YEAR TERMS TO EXPIRE JULY 2018 Mayor Christiansen submitted the following reappointments to the Board of Adjustment for three (3) year terms to expire July 2018: James N. Keller Richard Senato By consent agenda, Mr. Neil moved for approval of the reappointments, as recommended by Mayor Christiansen, seconded by Mr. Hutchison and carried by a unanimous roll call vote. FIRST READING OF PROPOSED ORDINANCE #2015-12 - REZONING REQUEST FOR PROPERTIES LOCATED AT 35 AND 39 NORTH NEW STREET A request was received to rezone properties located at 35 and 39 North New Street, consisting of 0.137+/- acres and 0.089+/- acres, owned by Robert and Erin Barrett and Erin L. Cooper, respectively. These properties are currently zoned RG-1 (General Residence) and the proposed zoning is RG-3 (Group Housing). Prior to amending the zoning ordinances and zoning map of the City of Dover, a public hearing is required. Staff recommended referral to the Planning Commission on July 20, 2015 and that a Public Hearing be set for August 10, 2015 at 7:30 p.m., at which time the Final Reading and Council action will take place. Mr. Hare moved to refer the request to the Planning Commission and set a Public Hearing for August 10, 2015 at 7:30 p.m., seconded by Mr. Cole. Mr. Neil inquired if this would be a group home or apartment house, stating his understanding that New Street is zoned for single-family residence. Responding, Mrs. Townshend stated that the group housing zone is a town house zone. The rezoning would allow the property owner to subdivide into three (3) lots instead of two (2) and develop town homes. In response to Mr. Neil, Mrs. Townshend stated that these would be tax-paying town homes. The motion to refer the request to the Planning Commission and set a Public Hearing for August 10, 2015 at 7:30 p.m. was carried unanimously. In accordance with Section 1-9 of the Dover Code, Council acknowledged the First Reading of Proposed Ordinance #2015-12 as read by the City Clerk, by title only, as follows: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF DOVER BY CHANGING THE ZONING DESIGNATION OF PROPERTIES LOCATED AT 35 AND 39 NORTH NEW STREET FINAL READING - PROPOSED ORDINANCE #2015-10 - NOTIFICATION OF TAX RATE INCREASE OVER THE ROLLED BACK TAX RATE [REQUIRED IN ACCORDANCE WITH 22 DELAWARE CODE SECTION 1105(B)] The First Reading of the proposed ordinance was accomplished during the Regular Council Meeting of June 8, 2015.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 35 Mr. Neil moved that the Final Reading of the Proposed Ordinance be acknowledged by title only, seconded by Mr. Cole and unanimously carried. Mr. Scott Koenig, City Manager, explained that this ordinance was the first step in tonight's budget approval process. Proposed Ordinance #2015-10 would take the current property tax rate of 33.78 cents per $100 of assessed value, incorporate the new value of $3,103,526,891 for the FY 16 assessment, and redo the calculations to create a revenue neutral assessment. He noted that this is called the roll back tax; however, based on current values, it would actually be a roll ahead tax, which would set the rate at 34.99 cents per $100 of assessed value. Mr. Koenig advised members that the final budget ordinance would be reviewed later in the evening, and the budget ordinance would increase the tax rate to 40.5 cents per $100 assessed value, thus creating a tax increase of 15.7% over the roll back in tax. Mr. Sudler inquired how much a taxpayer would pay per day with the tax increase. Responding, Mr. Koenig stated that this would depend on the location in the City. He stated that he had examined tax increases for some individuals who had written letters to the editor of the Delaware State News regarding this matter. In one (1) case, the increase amounted to approximately $48.68, per year, or roughly 13 cents a day; another equated to a tax decrease of $53.16 per year because the assessed value went down. Mr. Koenig stated that he a resident from Woodcrest, who had come before the microphone, would have an impact of approximately $90 per year. Another person on Pine Valley road experienced an increase in the assessed value as well as the tax rate, and their impact would be approximately $290 per year, or slightly less than a dollar a day. Mr. Koenig reminded members that calculations that showing the impact on residential properties across the City had been included in the budget presentation and he had not seen any that had an impact greater than a dollar per day, and many were less than that. Mr. Koenig stated that there would be an impact to the business community because their assessments, on average, went up across the City. He stated that it is necessary to make calculations for the actual property being discussed to identify the specific impact. Mr. Koenig stated that staff had been up front with the original proposed tax rate of 42 cents and the newspapers had since carried the rate of 40.5 per $100 of assessed value. People had the opportunity to call and ask what the impact is to their properties and, generally, those Mr. Koenig had talked to understood that if the rate is not adjusted and the operating and capital plans are not maintained, the next assessment of their property may go down, not due to the economy but because of a change in the character of their neighborhood. Mr. Hutchison noted that the General Assembly was proposing to cut grant-in-aid as well as the transportation fund. He asked how much the City typically receives in this type of funding. Responding, Mr. Koenig stated Dover is one of three (3) jurisdictions that receives Payment in Lieu of Taxes (PILOT), which is part of grant-in-aid, from the State. He estimated that funding for PILOT was approximately$275,000 for the current fiscal year. The City proposed roughly the same level of funding for FY 16. In regard to municipal street aid, Mr. Koenig stated his recollection that funding in the current year budget was approximately $665,000. In the FY 16 budget, it was assumed that the State may be splitting a pot of $5M State-wide, which would drop this number to roughly $550,000. Discussions with State legislators indicated there was potential for this number to go to $0 as part of budget discussions at the State. Mr. Koenig informed members that the Governor’s Office proposed municipal street aid at $3M versus the $4M on which staff was basing

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 36 its calculations, and this difference in State aid would affect the City’s budget by$165,000 dollars. He noted that PILOT payments and municipal street aid are big concerns to the City of Dover in developing the FY 16 budget and cautioned members that the City could not currently count on this revenue. In regard to Community Transportation Funds (CTF), Mr. Koenig stated that the City had partnered with various legislators on signage and improvements to roads, sidewalks, and parking areas. Legislators had also pledged CTF monies to fund cameras in the downtown as a substitute for a road project. Mr. Koenig stated that all of those funds were at risk for FY 16, based on the most recent discussions with Senator Bushweller and Representative Carson, and, to his belief, Representative Bennett. Staff was hopeful that none of those revenues would be cut, but was very conscious that this could occur in the next eight (8) days, as the legislature deliberates over the final State budget. Mr. Lewis questioned if the City had a back-up plan if these funds were cut. Responding, Mr. Koenig stated that if this occurs, he would return to Council advising them how the budget gap could be closed, and this would likely affect operating costs, capital projects, vehicles, etc. The next step would be to determine if positions must be frozen. This matter would be brought back to Council either on the Council floor or through a memorandum to Council. Mr. Koenig confirmed that staff would always have an alternate plan. Mr. Hosfelt moved to accept the tax rates and for adoption of Ordinance #2015-10. The motion was seconded by Mr. Cole. Mr. Anderson noted that the exact tax rate would be determined by the City’s spending. Mr. Anderson moved to defer consideration of Ordinance #2015-10 until after voting on Ordinance #2015-11. The motion was seconded by Mr. Hare and carried by a unanimous roll call vote. FINAL READING - PROPOSED ORDINANCE #2015-11 - 2015/2016 CITY OF DOVER BUDGET ORDINANCES The First Reading of the proposed ordinance was accomplished during the Regular Council Meeting of June 8, 2015. Mr. Neil moved that the Final Reading of the Proposed Ordinance be acknowledged by title only, seconded by Mr. Anderson and unanimously carried. In response to Mr. Anderson, Mr. Koenig stated that the cost of granting a bonus of 2% of base pay to non-bargaining employees making more than $75,000 would be $29,300. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Mr. Koenig indicated that this bonus would affect 15 people in the work force. Mr. Koenig stated that the drafting of the FY 16 operating budget had been a significant challenge for staff, the people who attended the budget hearings, and Council members, who participated in more than 15 hours of discussion. The original draft FY 16 City of Dover budget totaled approximately $137,071,000 across all funds. After the budget deliberations, that number was

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 37 revised to roughly $136,520,000. The original draft General Fund budget was approximately $41,000,830, which was decreased to $41,327,100 after the budget review. Mr. Koenig explained that a large driver in the budget was the number of full-time equivalents in the work force, with a net gain of 14 positions proposed, from 347 to 361. This was revised during Council deliberations to 360 positions, resulting in a net gain of 13. Mr. Koenig explained that part-time positions increased in the proposed budget by 15, from 78 to 93, including a number of police cadets, additional library staff, and some individuals related to Comcast broadcasting. He indicated that the major drivers of the General Fund were significant increases in public safety. Ten uniformed police officers were added, and there was an increase in Police Department civilians over the last year related to the civilianization of the Sex Offender Unit officers and a crime analyst and police accreditation position. An additional planner position was also proposed to support Dover’s designation as one of three (3) Down Development Districts within the State. Mr. Koenig stated that the proposed budget included increased operational spending for the Fire Department in the amount of $51,400. It also maintained a strong project and equipment Capital Investment Plan, including $1M in annual road maintenance and repairs. There was a significant increase in health care cost across the workforce of approximately 16.84%. A robust Capital Improvement Plan was also maintained in the Water/Sewer and Electric Funds. During Council’s review of the budget, total expenses were reduced by approximately $944,000, which altered the proposed tax rate from 42 cents per $100 of assessed value to 40.5 cents per $100 of assessed value. Mr. Koenig advised members that the reduction of the proposed tax rate and the required interfund transfers reduced projected revenue by $757,800. The proposed tax increase was roughly 24.3% and budget deliberations reduced that total tax rate increase, not the roll back tax rate increase, to 19.9% based on taking the tax rate from 33.78 cents to 40.5 cents. Mr. Koenig stated that the proposed FY 16 budget, does not include any increases in rates related to the water or sewer utilities because of expected revenue from the Garrison Energy Center project. This project allowed acceleration of the additional transfer from the water and sewer utility to the $850,000 that was identified in the Utility and Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee meetings held earlier in the day. Mr. Koenig noted that an approximate 3% electric rate increase was proposed across all classifications based on a detailed cost of service study done with the City’s consultant, Burns and McDonnell. This was done to accurately apply expenses related to cost in each classification so that industrial customers are not subsidizing the residential rate and residential customers are not subsidizing other rate classifications. The cost of service study is designed to appropriate allocate costs across the various rate classifications. Mr. Koenig advised that distorting this creates a very difficult rate structure to defend to the City’s customers. He indicated that the residential numbers in the budget were slightly less than some of the commercial numbers, noting that the increase was from roughly 2.2% to as high as approximately 3.6% for certain industrial or commercial classifications. However, Mr. Koenig advised members that this was being driven by the cost to serve those customers and was not a distorted cost in the model. The City, through the budget, had continued to adhere to its financial policies to fulfill the fiduciary responsibilities its bond holders, taxpayers, and employees, while maintaining a strong public safety presence, service quality, and quality of life programs that benefit everyone in the City.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 38 Mr. Koenig reiterated that was a very difficult and sometimes contentious budget to prepare and was a compromise between Council, staff, the Mayor, and those who came to the microphone and spoke on behalf of programs, staff, or projects that they would like to see in the budget. Mr. Koenig expressed thanks to the staff who participated, noting that this is a budget that staff believed was necessary to maintain the quality of life in the City of Dover. Mr. Sudler questioned, realistically, how much further the percentage could be brought down if the budget were cut further. Responding, Mr. Koenig advised members that, from a managerial standpoint, Council cut where appropriate when they made motions regarding the draft budget. He stated that in the five (5) year forecast, if the roughly 40.5 cent tax rate is not maintained, staff may be back before Council asking for additional increases. He felt that while there may be some short-term benefit from adjusting that rate, this may end up being only 12 or 24 months. Optimistically, Mr. Koenig stated that there was hope that the City economy may turn around, noting that a lot of the local budget is driven by the construction market. He expressed his fear that if another penny were shaved off taxes and State revenues do not come forward, the City would be in a difficult position, and his recommendation would then be not to send officers to the Police Academy or to defer major public improvements like road work or vehicle purchases. Mr. Koenig indicated that this would put the City back into a position of trying to catch up, and the cost to pave a road does not got down while waiting another year. In response to Mr. Lewis, Mr. Koenig stated that he did not bring an alternate budget tonight. Noting that he had heard series of concerns pertaining to electric rates, especially with larger users, Mr. Hutchison stated that an alternative must be developed. He expressed support for the budget; however, he felt that the City could not continue to do what it was doing. Mr. Koenig responded that, from a competitiveness standpoint, he was not happy that the City was proposing an increase to commercial electric grades. He stated that, as of today, the City of Dover had the lowest residential rates in the State, including all municipalities that have utilities, the Delaware Electric Cooperative, and Delmarva Power. However, the City is not nearly as competitive as Mr. Koenig believed it should be in commercial classifications. He felt that the City must work with its larger customers to figure out how to jointly reduce peak demands, help them with demand charges and energy efficiency programs, and see if they are willing to partner with green energy proposals related to solar, wind, or some other aspect of energy management. He stated the goal to work on an integrated resource plan that may allow projects like battery storage to move forward in the future. Mr. Koenig indicated that these are long-term things that the City must discuss with customers for the benefit of both the City and individual. He stated concern that the City’s load profile looks flat. Although there are some businesses that seem to be increasing their demand, every time a residential house replaces a new A/C unit, that new unit is much more efficient than the last unit and has the potential to use less power. He expressed the difficulty of determining how to reduce cost due to the dynamics of electric rate design and the electric system, noting the need to meet with experts in the electric utility and with customers to figure out how to reduce rates. Based on tonight's discussion, Mr. Koenig’s recommendation would be to increase the rates and then begin a metric to bring forward a plan to benefit customers, specifically commercial customers, as well as the City, with the overall goal to reduce commercial rates to attract businesses. He noted that

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 39 commercial and residential rates had come down substantially over the last four (4) years. While this would be a 3% or 3.5% percent rate increase, over the last three (3) budget years there had been a reduction of more than 25% in electric rates. Mr. Anderson inquired if Mr. Koenig was concerned regarding planned job increases and expansions on the industrial side that seemed to be dragging on, noting that some of the complaints received related to Kraft and Procter & Gamble, others to electric rates, which are 25% higher than for instance, Federalsburg or other places near Dover. Responding, Mr. Koenig stated that some of the businesses that staff had spoken to were not very sensitive to the electric rate. He explained that a budget could not be designed that addresses the needs of every single customer. Mr. Koenig stated that staff was very concerned about the electric rates, but the increase in the transfer from $8M to $10M from the Electric Fund influenced electric rates. This action was taken to defer a tax increase last year. Mr. Koenig emphasized that this is a total City budget and it is necessary to look at the total package. Even if electric costs were lower, there would be no guarantee that these businesses would add jobs, since they may make a decision that it is in their best interest to take jobs away from the City, and the City would be left with the remnants. Mr. Koenig stated that it is difficult to design a budget or service solely based on the input from the customers in this type of environment. The City uses its utilities to fund other operations and this is a difficult, multiple input equation. Mr. Neil moved for adoption of Proposed Ordinance #2015-11 as presented, seconded by Mr. Cole. Mr. Hare commented that approximately $600,000 would be carried over from last year and put into the City’s unfunded liabilities. Mr. Koenig stated that this was in accordance with Council policies. Mr. Hare stated that this could be suspended for year to help offset some of the increase. In addition, he stated that a freeze could be put on hiring the new electric position until some more definitive information is obtained regarding what the City will do in the electric area. He stated that this would be a savings of $150,000. Mr. Koenig stated that if the $600,000 of projected savings from the current year were moved forward, this would violate the policies that Council had guided staff to use in developing the operating budget. He stressed that Council had specifically wanted current revenues to equal current expenses and that the budget technique of moving money forward was one (1) of the reasons why the City was now in a difficult position. Mr. Koenig noted that the City did not fund its unfunded liabilities for many years, and many people were angry and concerned that those liabilities were not funded. Mr. Koenig stated his opinion that the City had made a lot of headway over the last few years in funding those bad positions and felt it would not be prudent to keep changing the game because it had been agreed that this is how the budget would be prepared. Mr. Koenig reminded members that the assistant generation manager position was included in the budget for half a year. He indicated that a motion was made previously that he believed would handicap his ability to recruit for that position because he now has to come back to Council to ask for it. The impact to the Electric Fund for half a year would be approximately $75,000 at most,

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 40 which would not eliminate the proposed rate increase. Mr. Koenig expressed his belief that if Council is truly serious about working with its largest customers, this technical expertise must be on board so that improvements, rates, and policies can be designed to create a partnership to help reduce rates in the long term. The assistant general manager position at the power plant was proposed to protect the City’s interest in a facility that has hundreds of millions of dollars of value today and a potential output every year of millions of dollars. Mr. Koenig stated that the value to the system is approximately $8M per year, equating to $80M over a 10-year period and he felt that the City must think about succession planning and the protection of the utility for the long run. Noting that the City had been in the electric generation business since roughly 1900, Mr. Koenig advised members that owning generation acts as a physical hedge to help keep the cost of buying power lower than it would be without those assets. He stated that the experts working for the City were telling Mr. Koenig that it would be prudent to take a preemptive approach and request the hiring of the assistant generation manager, and he felt it was a worthwhile position to put in the budget. Noting that the utility Mr. Koenig was speaking of was 56 or 57 years old and runs on oil, Mr. Hare questioned what it would cost if one (1) of the generators goes down. Responding, Mr. Koenig stated that the plant runs on duel fuel and runs on oil, if necessary, in the wintertime; in the summer it would run on gas, if it were available. The replacement value was well over $100M and the economic value of this, as an asset was at least the amount of the replacement value. Mr. Hare stated that utility experts question why the City still has a plant that is 56 years old, stating that money was being poured into a black hole. He felt that it should either be upgraded to make it efficient so that it could run like the new Calpine plant or be scrapped. He indicated that some say they have plants that are 40-45 years old that they scrap and build new ones or do something else. Responding, Mr. Koenig stated that it would be technically infeasible to make the City’s plant as efficient as the brand new Calpine plant and a new plant would have to be built. Mr. Hare questioned if the City was better off putting millions into its plant and keeping it at half efficiency when it was unknown beyond another year if the grid would continue to pay the City. In response, Mr. Koenig stated the projections had been made to be cash positive for five (5) years. Mr. Hare stated that this was provided the grid continues to give the City $10M per year. Responding, Mr. Koenig indicated that this was based on the best available data. Mr. Hare stated that the City was looking at signing a new contract with the company to keep its 60-year-old plant available for a three (3) to five (5) year contract and it was unknown if the grid would continue to give the City the money to offset this contract. Responding, Mr. Koenig stated that this was based on current history. Mr. Lewis stated that he had been on Council for a little over a month, along with four (4) other colleagues. He indicated that some say it was wrong for them to be hit with this tax burden; however, he stated this was the job that they were elected to do. He noted that no one present, including himself, had all the answers and that is why Council relies on Mr. Koenig, Mrs. Mitchell, and Mrs. Townshend, because they are the experts. Mr. Lewis stated his understanding that

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 41 Mr. Koenig had an alternate budget that Mr. Lewis understood would take the tax increase down. He asked for information on this. Mr. Lewis expressed his understanding of the need to increase manpower for the police, stating his belief that public safety was essential, and he was aware that the infrastructure needed repair; however, he felt there were other things that could be nickeled and dimed to get the tax rate down. Mr. Koenig stated that this approach would not achieve a significant change to the tax, noting that $300,000 of General Fund expense equates to one (1) penny off the tax rate. He indicated that staff had presented every divisional budget and given Council the opportunity to cut wherever they chose, and Council had authorized cuts down to 40.5 cents. In regard to the alternate plan he referenced earlier, Mr. Koenig stated that this related to the things that the City would not be able to do if State revenue does not come in as projected; there was no alternative plan available tonight. Mr. Lewis stated that he could not support an increase of this percentage. Mr. Anderson moved to amend the grounds budget to a level of $1,375,000, for a net savings of $37,000, seconded by Mr. Sudler. Mr. Koenig stated that this was an allocated fund; therefore, this would result in approximately $14,000 in General Fund savings. In response to Mr. Sudler regarding the impact on operational necessities, Mr. Koenig stated that he was unsure how a reduction of $37,000 would impact the grounds budget, because the current motion was the first time he had heard anything regarding this matter. Mr. Hosfelt questioned how the amount of $37,000 was arrived at. Mr. Anderson stated that this would allow increases in temporary help, increases in health care, and purchases of materials and small tools, but would take away any increase above that. Mr. Neil expressed his opinion that this budget would be an investment in this City. He stated that accountants tell you what you should do; you do not have to do it, and that staff are the City’s accountants who way what will work for the City. In addition, Mr. Neil stated that shopping malls and restaurants refurbish their facilities and make them look better so that people will come in. Mr. Neil felt that investing in the City and bringing up the values of the homes would raise the evaluation, which would raise tax income without people paying higher taxes, because the values would go up. Mr. Neil stated that with NASCAR and the Firefly and Big Barrel music festivals, hotels were filling up, and if they were doing better business, they would pay higher taxes. Mr. Neil expressed the desire to keep taxes down for the people here and provide them with the police to give greater security, which would also bring people in. Mr. Neil stated, for this reason, that he would oppose the amendment and support the budget as presented. Mr. Hare stated that he did not disagree with Mr. Neil, but Mr. Hare stated that did not have all the information. He indicated that it may not be necessary to raise taxes, but he did not have the information. Mr. Hare stated that the City does not know if its insurance rates are the best. He felt

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 42 that businesses and hotels do more due diligence, and if something is not efficient they change it and make sure it is more efficient, and they have the information they need make their decision. Mr. Hare stated that he did not feel he had the information to make an educated guess and tell the people that he was sorry, but this was the easy way out. The motion to amend the grounds budget to a level of $1,375,000 for a net savings of $37,000 failed by a roll call vote of seven (7) no (Sudler, Neil Cole, Hosfelt, Hare, Hutchison, and Slavin) and two (2) yes (Anderson and Lewis). Mr. Anderson moved to remove the bonuses for those earning $75,000 and above from the budget and that they be deferred to a supplemental budget for department heads to find more savings to cover them, seconded by Mr. Lewis. Mr. Hosfelt stated that, going back to his previous employment status as the Chief of Police, he did not know how he would have found room to chop that budget any more to give himself a pay raise. He felt that this goes against everything that should be done as a supervisor, leader, city manager, or a department head. Mr. Hosfelt felt it unfair to ask those whom Council had hired and put a lot of trust into to do this. He felt that ultimately they were being asked to sacrifice others, or things that should be done for employees, so that they can receive a pay raise. For this reason, he indicated that he would not support this. In response to Mr. Sudler, Mr. Koenig reiterated that the impact would be $29,300 in the revised budget and would affect 15 people. Mr. Hare did not think there was anything wrong with a 2% bonus; however, he felt that this 2% should not be approved now. He stated that these individuals should earn the 2% next year and see if they could get it again and again. Responding to Mr. Sudler in regard to employees earning less than $75,000, Mr. Koenig stated that non-bargaining employees making less than $75,000 would receive a 3% adjustment to their base salary. The motion to remove the bonuses for those earning $75,000 and above from the budget and that they be deferred to a supplemental budget for department heads to find more savings to cover them failed by a roll call vote of seven (7) no (Sudler, Neil, Cole, Hosfelt, Hare, Hutchison, and Slavin) and two (2) yes (Anderson and Lewis). The motion to adopt Ordinance #2015-11, as presented, (Exhibit #1) was carried by a roll call vote of six (6) yes (Sudler, Neil, Cole, Hosfelt, Hutchison, and Slavin) and three (3) no (Anderson, Lewis, and Hare). The motion to accept the tax rates and for adoption of Ordinance #2015-10 (Exhibit #2) was carried by a roll call vote of six (6) yes (Sudler, Neil, Cole, Hosfelt, Hutchison, and Slavin) and three (3) no (Anderson, Lewis, and Hare).

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 43 COUNCIL MEMBERS’ ANNOUNCEMENTS Mr. Sudler stated that the budget process had been a learning experience for him and all that had been done, including cutting, had been tough. He stated that this evening’s discussion in regard to whether the budget could be reduced further and how much impact this would have were the determining factors in his decision. He expressed hope that his constituents would understand his belief that Council had done all that could be done to get the budget to a reasonable level. Mr. Slavin expressed appreciation for the spirit in which members brought their concerns. He indicated that Mr. Anderson’s and Mr. Lewis’ concerns were duly noted and he looked forward to working with them on those concerns going forward. Noting Mr. Hare’s comment that Council had taken the easy route by raising taxes, Mr. Slavin said he did not think any other member of Council used the phrase, "It was easy to raise property taxes." Mr. Slavin indicated there was nothing easy about it in his mind, and expressed his belief that he spoke for a number of members of Council. In the spirit of civility and the spirit of our City, he thanked everyone for their work on the budget, including staff and members of Council, and especially Mr. Koenig and Mrs. Mitchell. Mr. Anderson invited everyone to attend the African American Festival, “Positively Dover”, stating that this is a non-exclusive event that is a celebration of culture for all people. He stated that the event would be held Saturday, June 27, 2015 at Legislative Mall from 10 a.m. to 8 p.m. and encouraged everyone to come and enjoy the music, dance, and other entertainment. Mr. Neil moved for adjournment, seconded by Mr. Lewis and unanimously carried. Meeting adjourned at 9:40 p.m. TRACI A. McDOWELL CITY CLERK All orders, ordinances, and resolutions adopted by City Council during their Regular Meeting of June 22, 2015, are hereby approved. ROBIN R. CHRISTIANSEN MAYOR /TM S:\AGENDAS-MINUTES-PACKETS-PRESENTATIONS-ATT&EXH\Council-Minutes\2015\06-22-2015.wpd Exhibits Exhibit #1 - Ordinance #2015-11 - 2015-2016 City of Dover Budget Ordinances Exhibit #2 - Ordinance #2015-10 - Notification of Tax Rate Increase Over the Rolled Back Tax Rate

Exhibit #1 Regular City Council Meeting of 06/22/2015 CITY OF DOVER ORDINANCE # 2015-11 2015-2016 BUDGET ORDINANCES BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: The amount hereinafter named aggregating Forty Five Million Three Hundred Four Thousand Six Hundred dollars ($45,304,600) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2015 and ending June 30, 2016: GENERAL FUND CASH RECEIPT SUMMARY FOR 2015-2016 2014/15 2015/16 REVISED BUDGET BEGINNING BALANCE $ 4,361,500 $ 3,977,500 RECEIPTS FINES AND POLICE REVENUE 629,300 702,300 INVESTMENT INCOME 40,000 35,000 LIBRARY REVENUES 71,600 72,000 KENT COUNTY BOOK REIMBURSEMENT 490,000 450,000 BUSINESS LICENSES 1,460,000 1,425,000 PERMITS AND OTHER FEES 1,354,200 1,436,300 MISCELLANEOUS CHARGES 27,600 22,700 POLICE EXTRA DUTY 659,500 533,000 PROPERTY TAXES 11,086,800 12,844,500 BID REVENUE 49,500 49,700 RECREATION REVENUE 148,800 149,000 FRANCHISE FEE 656,400 672,300 SANITATION FEES 2,580,000 2,580,000 RENT REVENUE - GARRISON FARM 92,300 93,700 COURT OF CHANCERY FEES 1,074,400 1,065,100 RECEIPTS SUBTOTAL 20,420,400 22,130,600 INTERFUND SERVICE RECEIPTS INTRAFUND SERVICE RECEIPTS W/WW 1,371,100 1,492,700 INTRAFUND SERVICE RECEIPTS ELECTRIC 3,588,200 3,738,500 INTERFUND SERVICE RECEIPTS SUBTOTAL 4,959,300 5,231,200 GRANTS: POLICE RELATED/EXTRA DUTY 124,000 74,400 POLICE PENSION GRANT 500,000 500,000 GREEN ENERGY GRANT 98,500 98,500 MISC GRANT REVENUE 25,000 25,000 VERIZON RESERVE - 50,000 GRANTS SUBTOTAL 747,500 747,900 TRANSFERS FROM: TRANSFER TAX 1,525,200 1,340,000 MUNICIPAL STREET AID 664,200 564,200 CIVIL TRAFFIC PENALTIES 450,000 450,000 WATER/WASTEWATER 500,000 850,000 ELECTRIC 10,000,000 10,000,000 OTHER RESERVES 4,000 13,200 CONTINGENCY FUND 50,000 - BOND PROCEEDS - SERIES 2014 475,000 - TRANSFERS FROM SUBTOTAL 13,668,400 13,217,400 TOTAL REVENUES 39,795,600 41,327,100 TOTAL BEGINNING BALANCE & REVENUE $ 44,157,100 $ 45,304,600 1

2015-2016 BUDGET ORDINANCES - CONTINUED GENERAL FUND - EXPENDITURES AND BUDGET BALANCE FOR 2015-2016 2014/15 2015/16 DEPARTMENT EXPENSES REVISED BUDGET CITY CLERK $ 386,700 $ 383,400 COUNCIL 106,600 118,100 TAX ASSESSOR 319,100 234,800 FIRE 716,100 745,400 GROUNDS MAINTENANCE 1,130,900 1,210,300 LIBRARY 1,422,000 1,510,000 RECREATION 710,800 729,500 LIFE SAFETY 534,600 482,200 CODE ENFORCEMENT 420,500 419,400 PLANNING 449,400 534,000 INSPECTIONS 614,400 664,700 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 223,000 238,000 POLICE 14,338,900 15,159,000 POLICE EXTRA DUTY 712,500 602,400 STREETS 676,200 674,500 SANITATION 2,224,800 2,157,900 CITY MANAGER 595,900 750,300 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 736,600 704,800 FINANCE 970,000 978,500 PUBLIC WORKS - ADMINISTRATION 518,100 626,800 FACILITIES MANAGEMENT 690,400 707,500 PUBLIC WORKS - ENGINEERING 193,700 181,400 PROCUREMENT & INVENTORY 542,800 560,200 FLEET MAINTENANCE 799,700 768,500 CUSTOMER SERVICE 1,044,600 1,120,100 HUMAN RESOURCES 385,500 383,900 MAYOR 82,500 76,100 DEPARTMENT SUBTOTALS 31,546,300 32,721,700 OTHER EXPENSES DEBT SERVICE 948,400 660,800 CONTRIBUTION TO DDP 70,000 70,000 MISCELLANEOUS GRANT RELATED EXP 25,000 25,000 INSURANCE 675,000 690,000 RETIREES HEALTH CARE 1,636,500 1,895,600 OTHER EMPLOYMENT EXPENSES 74,900 520,100 BANK & CREDIT CARD FEES - 15,000 UNCOLLECTIBLES - TRASH AND OTHER 50,000 50,000 STREET LIGHTS (APPROP TO STREET LGT FUND) 774,500 797,700 OTHER EXPENSE SUBTOTAL 4,254,300 4,724,200 TRANSFERS TRANSFER TO CAPITAL ASSET RESERVE 60,000 - TRANSFER TO CAPITAL FUND - PROJECTS 2,196,000 2,625,400 APPROP. TO THE POLICE PENSION FUND 755,000 570,000 APPROP. POLICE PENSION - STATE GRANT 500,000 500,000 APPROP. TO THE GENERAL PENSION FUND 543,000 - TRANSFER TO CONTINGENCY RESERVE 300,000 - TRANSFER TO PARKLAND RESERVE 25,000 - TRANSFER TO VERIZON RESERVE - 50,000 TRANSFER TO INVENTORY WRITE-OFFS - 10,000 TRANSFERS SUBTOTAL 4,379,000 3,755,400 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 40,179,600 41,201,300 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE 3,977,500 4,103,300 TOTALS $ 44,157,100 $ 45,304,600 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. ADOPTED: JUNE 22, 2015 2

2015-2016 BUDGET ORDINANCES - CONTINUED BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: The amount hereinafter named aggregating Two Million Eight Hundred Five Thousand Five Hundred dollars ($2,805,500) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2015 and ending June 30, 2016: GOVERNMENTAL CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2015-2016 REVENUES 2014/15 2015/16 REVISED BUDGET BEGINNING BALANCE - PROJECTS $ 2,654,600 $ 154,800 REVENUES STATE GRANTS - Other 208,000 - PROPOSED BOND/BANK PROCEEDS - Street 2,675,000 - LEASE PURCHASE OF FIRE AND POLICE EQUIPT 918,300 - INCOME FROM SALE OF ASSETS - 20,300 INTEREST EARNINGS - 5,000 TRANSFER FROM GENERAL FUND 2,196,000 2,625,400 TRANSFER FROM PARKLAND RESERVE 104,000 - SUBTOTAL PROJECT RECEIPTS 6,101,300 2,650,700 TOTAL FUNDING SOURCES 6,101,300 2,650,700 TOTAL BEGINNING BALANCE AND REVENUES $ 8,755,900 $ 2,805,500 EXPENSE SUMMARY 2014/15 2015/16 EXPENDITURES REVISED BUDGET FIRE $ 827,300 $ 145,600 GROUNDS MAINTENANCE 86,700 201,100 RECREATION 284,400 - LIFE SAFETY - 55,700 POLICE 601,700 262,100 STREETS 470,300 1,428,500 STREETS - GARRISON FARM INFRASTRUCTURE 5,447,600 - SANITATION 256,500 449,000 CITY MANAGER - 24,700 PROCUREMENT & INVENTORY 55,000 - FLEET MAINTENANCE - 84,000 DEPARTMENT SUBTOTAL 8,029,500 2,650,700 TRANSFERS & MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES BOND/LOAN ISSUANCE COST 61,100 - TRANSFER TO PARKLAND RESERVE 180,000 - TRANSFER TO CAPITAL ASSET RESERVE 330,500 - TRANSFERS & MISCELLANEOUS SUBTOTAL 571,600 - TOTAL EXPENDITURES 8,601,100 2,650,700 BUDGET BALANCE 154,800 154,800 TOTAL BUDGET BALANCE & EXPENDITURES $ 8,755,900 $ 2,805,500 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. ADOPTED: JUNE 22, 2015 3

2015-2016 BUDGET ORDINANCES - CONTINUED GENERAL FUND CONTINGENCY CASH RECEIPTS/REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2015-2016 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: The amount hereinafter named aggregating Seven Hundred Twenty Thousand Three Hundred dollars ($720,300) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2015 and ending June 30, 2016: CASH RECEIPTS 2014/15 2015/16 REVISED BUDGET BEGINNING BALANCE $ 467,300 $ 719,200 INTEREST EARNED 1,900 1,100 TRANSFER FROM GENERAL FUND 300,000 - TOTALS $ 769,200 $ 720,300 EXPENSE SUMMARY 2014/15 2015/16 REVISED BUDGET TRANSFER TO OPERATING ACCOUNT $ 50,000 $ - CARRY FORWARD TO NEXT YEAR 719,200 720,300 TOTALS $ 769,200 $ 720,300 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. ADOPTED: JUNE 22, 2015 4

2015-2016 BUDGET ORDINANCES - CONTINUED GENERAL CAPITAL ASSET RESERVE CASH RECEIPTS/REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2015-2016 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: The amount hereinafter named aggregating Nine Hundred Sixteen Thousand Five Hundred ($916,500) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2015 and ending June 30, 2016: CASH RECEIPTS 2014/15 2015/16 REVISED BUDGET BEGINNING BALANCE $ 521,000 $ 914,000 RECEIPTS INTEREST EARNINGS 2,500 2,500 TRANSFER FROM GENERAL FUND CAPITAL PROJECT FUND 330,500 - TRANSFER FROM GENERAL FUND 60,000 - TOTAL RECEIPTS 393,000 2,500 TOTALS $ 914,000 $ 916,500 EXPENSE SUMMARY 2014/15 2015/16 REVISED BUDGET CARRY FORWARD TO NEXT YEAR $ 914,000 $ 916,500 TOTALS $ 914,000 $ 916,500 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. ADOPTED: JUNE 22, 2015 5

2015-2016 BUDGET ORDINANCES - CONTINUED PARKLAND/RECREATION RESERVE CASH RECEIPTS/REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2015-2016 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: The amount hereinafter named aggregating Two Hundred Ninety Six Thousand Seven Hundred Dollars ($296,700) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2015 and ending June 30, 2016: OPERATING REVENUES 2014/15 2015/16 REVISED BUDGET PRIOR YEAR BALANCE $ 218,700 $ 295,700 GENERAL FUND APPROPRIATION 180,000 - INTEREST INCOME 1,000 1,000 TOTALS $ 399,700 $ 296,700 OPERATING EXPENSES 2014/15 2015/16 REVISED BUDGET TRANSFER TO GENERAL CAPITAL PROJECT FUND $ 104,000 $ - CURRENT YEAR BALANCE 295,700 296,700 TOTALS $ 399,700 $ 296,700 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. ADOPTED: JUNE 22, 2015 6

2015-2016 BUDGET ORDINANCES - CONTINUED WATER/WASTEWATER FUND REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2015-2016 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: The amount hereinafter named aggregating Sixteen Million Eight Hundred Eighty Two Thousand Seven Hundred dollars ($16,882,700) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2015 and ending June 30, 2016: 2014/15 2015/16 REVISED BUDGET BEGINNING BALANCE - WATER $ 783,500 $ 861,600 BEGINNING BALANCE - WASTEWATER 19,900 293,400 TOTAL BEGINNING BALANCES 803,400 1,155,000 BASE REVENUE WATER SERVICES 4,616,400 6,200,000 WASTEWATER SERVICES 3,706,800 3,728,000 WASTEWATER TREATMENT SERVICES 2,902,600 3,026,500 GROUNDWATER INFLOW ADJUSTMENT 1,862,500 1,864,300 WATER TANK SPACE LEASING 331,900 341,900 SEWER IMPACT FEES 416,700 250,000 WATER IMPACT FEES 462,400 250,000 INTEREST - WATER 9,000 1,000 INTEREST - WASTEWATER 14,000 2,000 MISCELLANEOUS SERVICE FEE 64,000 64,000 TOTAL REVENUES 14,386,300 15,727,700 TOTAL BEGINNING BALANCES AND REVENUES $ 15,189,700 $ 16,882,700 7

2015-2016 BUDGET ORDINANCES - CONTINUED WATER/WASTEWATER FUND - EXPENSES AND BUDGET BALANCE FOR 2015-2016 2014/15 2015/16 DIRECT EXPENSES REVISED BUDGET ENGINEERING & INSPECTION $ 502,400 $ 517,500 WATER CONSTRUCTION 253,300 - WATER DEPARTMENT 488,600 673,300 WATER TREATMENT PLANT 1,582,200 1,910,000 WASTEWATER DEPARTMENT 975,400 968,600 DIRECT EXPENDITURE SUBTOTAL 3,801,900 4,069,400 OTHER EXPENSES DEBT SERVICE - WATER 560,100 545,200 DEBT SERVICE - WASTEWATER 591,900 586,900 RETIREES HEALTH CARE 200,000 178,600 OTHER EMPLOYMENT EXPENSES 5,500 20,000 KENT COUNTY TREATMENT CHARGE 4,004,200 4,130,000 INTRAFUND SERVICE FEES 1,371,100 1,492,700 BANK & CREDIT CARD FEES - 46,200 OTHER EXPENSES SUBTOTAL 6,732,800 6,999,600 TRANSFER TO: GENERAL FUND FROM WATER 250,000 550,000 GENERAL FUND FROM WASTEWATER 250,000 300,000 WATER IMP AND EXT 1,200,000 1,800,000 WASTEWATER IMP AND EXT 1,800,000 1,500,000 CONTINGENCY RESERVE WATER - 32,000 TRANSFER TO SUBTOTAL 3,500,000 4,182,000 TOTAL EXPENSES 14,034,700 15,251,000 BUDGET BALANCES BUDGET BALANCE WATER 861,600 1,048,600 BUDGET BALANCE WASTEWATER 293,400 583,100 BUDGET BALANCE SUBTOTALS 1,155,000 1,631,700 TOTAL CURRENT YEAR BALANCES AND EXPENSES $ 15,189,700 $ 16,882,700 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. ADOPTED: JUNE 22, 2015 8

2015-2016 BUDGET ORDINANCES - CONTINUED WATER/WASTEWATER IMPROVEMENT & EXTENSION FUND CASH RECEIPTS/REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2015-2016 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: The amount hereinafter named aggregating Five Million Three Hundred Seventy Nine Thousand Four Hundred dollars ($5,379,400) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2015 and ending June 30, 2016: CASH RECEIPTS 2014/15 2015/16 REVISED BUDGET BEGINNING BALANCE - WATER $ 7,178,100 $ 833,500 BEGINNING BALANCE - WASTEWATER 5,677,600 1,055,900 TOTAL BEGINNING BALANCES 12,855,700 1,889,400 REVENUES TRANS FR OPERATING FUND - WATER 1,200,000 1,800,000 TRANS FR OPERATING FUND - WASTEWATER 1,800,000 1,500,000 TRANSFER FR WASTEWATER IMPACT FEE 1,315,600 165,000 INTEREST INCOME 40,000 25,000 TOTAL REVENUES 4,355,600 3,490,000 TOTAL BEGINNING BALANCES & REVENUES $ 17,211,300 $ 5,379,400 EXPENSE SUMMARY 2014/15 2015/16 EXPENSES REVISED BUDGET WATER $ 7,526,500 $ 2,028,600 WASTEWATER 7,785,600 1,822,100 WATER TREATMENT PLANT 38,100 - TOTAL EXPENSES 15,350,200 3,850,700 BUDGET BALANCE - WATER 833,500 617,400 BUDGET BALANCE - WASTEWATER 1,027,600 911,300 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE SUBTOTALS 1,861,100 1,528,700 TOTAL BUDGET BALANCES & EXPENSES $ 17,211,300 $ 5,379,400 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. ADOPTED: JUNE 22, 2015 9

2015-2016 BUDGET ORDINANCES - CONTINUED WATER/WASTEWATER CAPITAL ASSET RESERVE CASH RECEIPTS/REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2015-2016 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: The amount hereinafter named aggregating One Million Thirty Three Thousand Seven Hundred Dollars ($1,033,700) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2015 and ending June 30, 2016: CASH RECEIPTS 2014/15 2015/16 REVISED BUDGET BEGINNING BALANCE - WATER $ 508,400 $ 514,600 BEGINNING BALANCE - WASTEWATER 507,300 511,300 TOTAL BEGINNING BALANCES 1,015,700 1,025,900 RECEIPTS INTEREST EARNINGS - WATER 900 3,900 INTEREST EARNINGS - WASTEWATER 900 3,900 2013 BONDS UNUSED COST OF ISSUANCE FUNDS WATER 5,300 - 2013 BONDS UNUSED COST OF ISSUANCE FUNDS WASTEWATER 3,100 - TOTAL RECEIPTS 10,200 7,800 TOTALS $ 1,025,900 $ 1,033,700 EXPENSE SUMMARY 2014/15 2015/16 REVISED BUDGET CURRENT YEAR BALANCE - WATER $ 514,600 $ 518,500 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE - WASTEWATER 511,300 515,200 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE SUBTOTALS 1,025,900 1,033,700 TOTALS $ 1,025,900 $ 1,033,700 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. ADOPTED: JUNE 22, 2015 10

2015-2016 BUDGET ORDINANCES - CONTINUED WATER/WASTEWATER IMPACT FEE RESERVE CASH RECEIPTS/REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2015-2016 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: The amount hereinafter named aggregating One Million Six Hundred Seventy Six Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($1,676,500) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2015 and ending June 30, 2016: CASH RECEIPTS 2014/15 2015/16 REVISED BUDGET BEGINNING BALANCE - WATER $ 200,200 $ 200,500 BEGINNING BALANCE - WASTEWATER 2,776,400 1,463,400 TOTAL BEGINNING BALANCES 2,976,600 1,663,900 RECEIPTS INTEREST EARNINGS - WATER 300 1,500 INTEREST EARNINGS - WASTEWATER 2,600 11,100 TOTAL RECEIPTS 2,900 12,600 TOTALS $ 2,979,500 $ 1,676,500 EXPENSE SUMMARY 2014/15 2015/16 REVISED BUDGET TRANSFER TO I & E FUND FROM WASTEWATER IMPACT FEES $ 1,315,600 $ 165,000 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE - WATER 200,500 202,000 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE - WASTEWATER 1,463,400 1,309,500 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE SUBTOTALS 1,663,900 1,511,500 TOTALS $ 2,979,500 $ 1,676,500 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. ADOPTED: JUNE 22, 2015 11

2015-2016 BUDGET ORDINANCES - CONTINUED WATER/WASTEWATER CONTINGENCY RESERVE CASH RECEIPTS/REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2015-2016 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: The amount hereinafter named aggregating Three Hundred Twenty Eight Thousand Eight Hundred dollars ($328,800) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2015 and ending June 30, 2016: CASH RECEIPTS 2014/15 2015/16 REVISED BUDGET BEGINNING BALANCE - WATER $ 104,700 $ 104,900 BEGINNING BALANCE - WASTEWATER 189,400 189,700 TOTAL BEGINNING BALANCES 294,100 294,600 RECEIPTS INTEREST EARNINGS 500 2,200 TRANSFER FROM OPERATING ACCOUNT TO WATER - 32,000 TOTAL RECEIPTS 500 34,200 TOTALS $ 294,600 $ 328,800 BUDGET SUMMARY 2014/15 2015/16 REVISED BUDGET CURRENT YEAR BALANCE - WATER 104,900 137,700 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE - WASTEWATER 189,700 191,100 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE SUBTOTALS 294,600 328,800 TOTAL EXPENSES AND CURRENT YEAR BALANCES $ 294,600 $ 328,800 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. ADOPTED: JUNE 22, 2015 12

2015-2016 BUDGET ORDINANCES - CONTINUED ELECTRIC REVENUE FUND REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2015-2016 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: The amount hereinafter named aggregating Eighty Nine Million Seven Hundred Thirteen Thousand Six Hundred dollars ($89,713,600) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2015 and ending June 30, 2016: 2014/15 2015/16 REVISED BUDGET BEGINNING BALANCE $ 6,602,900 $ 6,177,600 BASE REVENUE DIRECT SALES TO CUSTOMER 76,543,700 78,279,200 UTILITY TAX 1,258,300 1,281,100 MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE 624,000 597,200 RENT REVENUE 200,000 202,600 GREEN ENERGY 128,000 128,000 INTEREST EARNINGS 12,000 47,900 TRANSFER FROM RATE STABILIZATION 3,000,000 3,000,000 TOTAL REVENUES 81,766,000 83,536,000 TOTAL BEGINNING BALANCE & REVENUES 88,368,900 89,713,600 13

ELECTRIC REVENUE FUND - CONTINUED EXPENSES AND BUDGET BALANCE FOR 2015-2016 2014/15 2015/16 EXPENSES REVISED BUDGET POWER SUPPLY $ 26,035,900 $ 23,402,600 SOLAR ENERGY 2,002,700 2,313,900 SOLAR RENEWAL ENERGY CREDITS 375,500 363,400 POWER SUPPLY MANAGEMENT 996,000 996,000 REC'S (Renewable Energy Credits) 555,400 673,400 RGGI (Regional Greenhouse Gas Init.) - 175,000 PJM CHARGES - ENERGY 10,076,200 7,966,100 PJM CHARGES - TRANSMISSION & FEES 4,480,800 7,932,500 CAPACITY CHARGES 9,744,100 10,225,100 SUB-TOTAL POWER SUPPLY 54,266,600 54,048,000 PLANT OPERATIONS 6,141,100 6,434,600 GENERATIONS FUELS 1,873,400 1,167,300 PJM SPOT MARKET ENERGY (2,834,600) (1,708,300) PJM CREDITS (663,700) (360,000) CAPACITY CREDITS (8,742,100) (10,472,100) GENERATION SUBTOTAL (4,225,900) (4,938,500) POWER SUPPLY & GENERATION SUBTOTAL 50,040,700 49,109,500 DIRECT EXPENDITURES TRANSMISSION/DISTRIBUTION 3,954,900 4,068,600 ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING 1,379,300 1,335,800 ADMINISTRATION 632,400 839,300 METER READING 357,200 360,500 SYSTEMS OPERATIONS 696,500 679,800 DIRECT EXPENDITURE SUBTOTALS 7,020,300 7,284,000 OTHER EXPENSES: UTILITY TAX 1,258,300 1,281,100 ALLOW FOR UNCOLLECTIBLES 200,000 200,000 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES - RFP'S 246,800 - RETIREES HEALTH CARE 513,300 537,800 OTHER EMPLOYMENT EXPENSES 24,000 72,000 OPEB UNFUNDED LIABILITY 1,009,800 1,030,000 GREEN ENERGY PAYMENT TO DEMEC 128,000 128,000 INTRAFUND SERVICE FEES 3,588,200 3,738,500 INTEREST ON DEPOSITS 20,000 20,500 BANK & CREDIT CARD FEES - 242,300 DEBT SERVICE 3,391,900 3,402,000 OTHER EXPENSES SUBTOTAL 10,380,300 10,652,200 TRANSFER TO: IMPROVEMENT & EXTENSION 4,750,000 3,500,000 GENERAL FUND 10,000,000 10,000,000 TRANSFER INSURANCE RESERVE - 10,000 TRANSFER CONTINGENCY RESERVE - 13,000 TRANSFER TO SUBTOTAL 14,750,000 13,523,000 TOTAL EXPENSES 82,191,300 80,568,700 BUDGET BALANCE - WORKING CAPITAL 6,177,600 9,144,900 TOTALS $ 88,368,900 $ 89,713,600 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. ADOPTED: JUNE 22, 2015 14

2015-2016 BUDGET ORDINANCES - CONTINUED ELECTRIC UTILITY IMPROVEMENT AND EXTENSION FUND CASH RECEIPTS/REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2015-2016 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: The amount hereinafter named aggregating Nine Million Fifty Thousand Three Hundred dollars ($9,050,300) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2015 and ending June 30, 2016: REVENUES 2014/15 2015/16 REVISED BUDGET BEGINNING BALANCE $ 5,942,500 $ 3,623,600 REVENUES TRANSFER FROM ELECTRIC 4,750,000 3,500,000 GENERAL SERVICE BILLING 250,000 1,900,000 INTEREST EARNINGS 24,800 26,700 TOTAL REVENUES 5,024,800 5,426,700 TOTALS $ 10,967,300 $ 9,050,300 EXPENSE SUMMARY 2014/15 2015/16 EXPENSES REVISED BUDGET ELECTRIC GENERATION $ 2,739,300 $ 1,655,000 TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION 1,854,200 2,887,600 ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING 2,750,200 1,724,300 TOTAL EXPENSES 7,343,700 6,266,900 BUDGET BALANCE 3,623,600 2,783,400 TOTAL BUDGET BALANCE & EXPENSES $ 10,967,300 $ 9,050,300 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. ADOPTED: JUNE 22, 2015 15

2015-2016 BUDGET ORDINANCES - CONTINUED ELECTRIC UTILITY CONTINGENCY RESERVE CASH RECEIPTS/REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2015-2016 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: The amount hereinafter named aggregating Eight Hundred Fourty Four Thousand Six Hundred dollars ($844,600) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2015 and ending June 30, 2016: CASH RECEIPTS 2014/15 2015/16 REVISED BUDGET BEGINNING BALANCE $ 819,100 $ 825,300 RECEIPTS INTEREST EARNINGS 6,200 6,300 TRANSFER FROM ELECTRIC FUND - 13,000 TOTAL RECEIPTS 6,200 19,300 TOTALS $ 825,300 $ 844,600 EXPENSE SUMMARY 2014/15 2015/16 REVISED BUDGET CURRENT YEAR BALANCE 825,300 844,600 TOTALS $ 825,300 $ 844,600 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. ADOPTED: JUNE 22, 2015 16

2015-2016 BUDGET ORDINANCES - CONTINUED ELECTRIC UTILITY DEPRECIATION RESERVE SOURCES AND USE OF FUNDS FOR 2015-2016 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: The amount hereinafter named aggregating Ten Million Sixty Six Thousand Four Hundred dollars ($10,066,400) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2015 and ending June 30, 2016: CASH RECEIPTS 2014/15 2015/16 REVISED BUDGET BEGINNING BALANCE $ 9,915,100 $ 9,990,500 INTEREST EARNINGS 75,400 75,900 TOTALS $ 9,990,500 $ 10,066,400 BUDGET SUMMARY 2014/15 2015/16 REVISED BUDGET CURRENT YEAR BALANCE 9,990,500 10,066,400 TOTALS $ 9,990,500 $ 10,066,400 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. ADOPTED: JUNE 22, 2015 17

2015-2016 BUDGET ORDINANCES - CONTINUED ELECTRIC UTILITY FUTURE CAPACITY RESERVE SOURCES AND USE OF FUNDS FOR 2015-2016 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: The amount hereinafter named aggregating Ten Million Two Hundred Eighteen Thousand dollars ($10,218,000) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2015 and ending June 30, 2016: CASH RECEIPTS 2014/15 2015/16 REVISED BUDGET BEGINNING BALANCE $ 10,064,400 $ 10,140,900 INTEREST EARNINGS 76,500 77,100 TOTALS $ 10,140,900 $ 10,218,000 BUDGET SUMMARY 2014/15 2015/16 REVISED BUDGET CURRENT YEAR BALANCE 10,140,900 10,218,000 TOTALS $ 10,140,900 $ 10,218,000 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. ADOPTED: JUNE 22, 2015 18

2015-2016 BUDGET ORDINANCES - CONTINUED ELECTRIC UTILITY INSURANCE STABLIZATION RESERVE SOURCES AND USE OF FUNDS FOR 2015-2016 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: The amount hereinafter named aggregating Seven Hundred Fifty Eight Thousand Seven Hundred dollars ($758,700) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2015 and ending June 30, 2016: CASH RECEIPTS 2014/15 2015/16 REVISED BUDGET BEGINNING BALANCE $ 737,500 $ 743,100 INTEREST EARNINGS 5,600 5,600 TRANSFER FROM ELECTRIC FUND - 10,000 TOTALS $ 743,100 $ 758,700 BUDGET SUMMARY 2014/15 2015/16 REVISED BUDGET CURRENT YEAR BALANCE 743,100 758,700 TOTALS $ 743,100 $ 758,700 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. ADOPTED: JUNE 22, 2015 19

2015-2016 BUDGET ORDINANCES - CONTINUED ELECTRIC UTILITY RATE STABLIZATION RESERVE SOURCES AND USE OF FUNDS FOR 2015-2016 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: The amount hereinafter named aggregating Eight Million Five Hundred Fifty Six Thousand Four Hundred dollars ($8,556,400) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2015 and ending June 30, 2016: CASH RECEIPTS 2014/15 2015/16 REVISED BUDGET BEGINNING BALANCE $ 10,465,800 $ 7,545,300 INTEREST EARNINGS 79,500 57,300 TOTALS $ 10,545,300 $ 7,602,600 BUDGET SUMMARY 2014/15 2015/16 REVISED BUDGET TRANSFER TO ELECTRIC FUND $ 3,000,000 $ 3,000,000 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE 7,545,300 4,602,600 TOTALS $ 10,545,300 $ 7,602,600 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. ADOPTED: JUNE 22, 2015 20

2015-2016 BUDGET ORDINANCES - CONTINUED MUNICIPAL STREET AID FUND CASH RECEIPTS/REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2015-2016 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: The amount hereinafter named aggregating Five Hundred Sixty Four Thousand Three Hundred dollars ($564,300) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2015 and ending June 30, 2016: CASH RECEIPTS 2014/15 2015/16 REVISED BUDGET BEGINNING BALANCE $ 100 $ 100 STATE GRANT 664,200 564,200 TOTALS 664,300 564,300 BUDGET SUMMARY 2014/15 2015/16 REVISED BUDGET TRANSFER TO GENERAL FUND 664,200 564,200 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE 100 100 TOTALS $ 664,300 $ 564,300 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. ADOPTED: JUNE 22, 2015 21

2015-2016 BUDGET ORDINANCES - CONTINUED WORKERS COMPENSATION FUND CASH RECEIPTS/REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2015-2016 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: The amount hereinafter named aggregating One Million Seven Hundred Five Thousand Seven Hundred dollars ($1,705,700) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2015 and ending June 30, 2016: OPERATING REVENUES 2014/15 2015/16 REVISED BUDGET BEGINNING BALANCE $ 1,156,700 $ 1,052,600 INTEREST INCOME 10,600 10,600 PREMIUM FROM CITY 490,500 642,500 TOTALS $ 1,657,800 $ 1,705,700 OPERATING EXPENSES 2014/15 2015/16 REVISED BUDGET PROGRAM EXPENSES/SUPPLIES - CLAIMS $ 450,000 $ 475,000 INSURANCE 92,600 103,900 BANK FEES 600 1,300 STATE OF DEL - SELF INSURANCE TAX 37,000 37,000 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 25,000 25,000 TOTAL EXPENSES 605,200 642,200 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE 1,052,600 1,063,500 TOTALS $ 1,657,800 $ 1,705,700 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. ADOPTED: JUNE 22, 2015 22

2015-2016 BUDGET ORDINANCES - CONTINUED COMMUNITY TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT FUND CASH RECEIPTS/REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2015-2016 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: The amount hereinafter named aggregating Six Hundred Fourty Four Thousand Five Hundred dollars ($644,500) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2015 and ending June 30, 2016: OPERATING REVENUES 2014/15 2015/16 REVISED BUDGET PRIOR YEAR BALANCE $ 143,500 $ 144,000 GRANTS REVENUE 1,677,800 500,000 INTEREST INCOME 500 500 TOTALS $ 1,821,800 $ 644,500 OPERATING EXPENSES 2014/15 2015/16 REVISED BUDGET PROGRAM EXP. GRANT RELATED $ 1,677,800 $ 644,000 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE 144,000 500 TOTALS $ 1,821,800 $ 644,500 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. ADOPTED: JUNE 22, 2015 23

2015-2016 BUDGET ORDINANCES - CONTINUED LIBRARY GRANT FUND CASH RECEIPTS/REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2015-2016 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: The amount hereinafter named aggregating Two Hundred Ninety Eight Thousand Seven Hundred dollars ($298,700) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2015 and ending June 30, 2016: OPERATING REVENUES 2014/15 2015/16 REVISED BUDGET PRIOR YEAR BALANCE $ 44,800 $ 17,300 STATE GRANT 278,900 278,900 FEDERAL GRANT 2,500 2,500 TOTALS $ 326,200 $ 298,700 OPERATING EXPENSES 2014/15 2015/16 REVISED BUDGET STATE GRANTS FURNITURE/FIXTURES $ 15,100 $ 3,100 OFFICE SUPPLIES 28,000 24,000 PRINTING AND DUPLICATING 14,000 13,200 PROGRAM EXPENSES/SUPPLIES 29,900 24,100 BOOKS 132,600 129,200 AUDIO VISUAL SUPPLIES 75,100 75,100 POSTAGE 100 100 TRAINING/CONF/FOOD/TRAV 3,500 2,000 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 900 900 OFF EQP/REPAIRS & MAINT 6,000 6,000 OTHER EQUIP - LEASE 1,200 1,200 SUBTOTAL EXPENSES STATE GRANTS 306,400 278,900 FEDERAL GRANTS PROGRAM EXPENSES/SUPPLIES 2,500 2,500 SUBTOTAL EXPENSES FEDERAL GRANTS 2,500 2,500 GRAND TOTAL EXPENSES 308,900 281,400 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE 17,300 17,300 TOTALS $ 326,200 $ 298,700 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. ADOPTED: JUNE 22, 2015 24

2015-2016 BUDGET ORDINANCES - CONTINUED POLICE GRANTS FUND CASH RECEIPTS/REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2015-2016 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: The amount hereinafter named aggregating Six Hundred Fifty Two Thousand Three Hundred dollars ($652,300) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2015 and ending June 30, 2016: OPERATING REVENUES 2014/15 2015/16 REVISED BUDGET PRIOR YEAR BALANCE $ 172,100 $ 125,000 STATE AND FEDERAL GRANTS RECEIVED 436,400 527,300 TOTALS 608,500 652,300 OPERATING EXPENSES 2014/15 2015/16 REVISED BUDGET EXPENDITURES PERSONNEL EXPENDITURES CADET PROGRAM SALARIES 16,000 71,400 CADET PROGRAM FICA 1,200 5,400 CADET PROGRAM W/COMP 700 3,500 MATERIALS AND SUPPLIES POLICE EQUIPT & PROG SUPP 222,600 410,600 TECHNOLOGY EQUIPMENT 47,800 20,000 ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENDITURES CELL PHONE CHARGES 15,000 15,000 TRAINING 45,000 17,000 AUDIT FEES 1,000 1,000 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 10,200 - TOTAL EXPENDITURES 359,500 543,900 OTHER FINANCING USES OPERATING TRANSFERS-OUT 124,000 74,400 TOTAL FINANCING USES 124,000 74,400 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE 125,000 34,000 TOTALS $ 608,500 $ 652,300 The above budget represents the combination of all State & Federal Grants. The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. ADOPTED: JUNE 22, 2015 25

Exhibit #2 Regular Council Meeting of 06/22/2015 CITY OF DOVER ORDINANCE #2015-10 WHEREAS, the 2014/2015 fiscal year property tax rate for the City of Dover is $.3378 per hundred of assessed value and the Tax Assessor reported that the total assessed value of property as of December 31, 2014 was $3,191,130,460, including the April 2015 supplemental billings (2011 Assessed Value); and WHEREAS, upon completion of the re-evaluation completed in 2015, the Tax Assessor is reporting the total assessed value in 2015/2016 to be $3,103,526,891; and WHEREAS, Delaware State Law: 22 Delaware Code Section 1105 (b) requires municipalities to calculate a "rolled-back" tax rate so as to provide the same tax revenue as was levied during the prior fiscal year and to state the percent, if any, by which the property tax rate to be levied exceeds the "rolled-back" property tax rate. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: That the City of Dover "rolled-back" tax rate is $.3499 per hundred of assessed value, and the 2015/2016 tax rate is to be set at $.4050 per hundred of assessed value (estimated at $3,050,321,691), the increase over the rolled-back tax rate being 15.7%. ADOPTED: JUNE 22, 2015 S:\ORDINANCES\2015\ADOPTED\Ordinance #2015-10 - Notification of Tax Rate Increase Over the Rolled Back Tax Rate-ADOPTED 06-22-2015.wpd Actions History June 22, 2015 - Final Reading by City Council June 8, 2015 - First Reading by City Council

ACTION FORM PROCEEDING: City Council DEPARTMENT OF ORIGIN: Planning & Inspections DATE SUBMITTED: 6-26-2015 PREPARED BY: Ann Marie Townshend, AICP, Director of Planning and Community Development SUBJECT: 200 N West St, Dover, Delaware – Violation of Dangerous Building Ordinance REFERENCE: Chapter 22, Article XI – Dangerous Buildings, Sec. 22-385 - Hearing before Council and Chapter 22, Article XI - Dangerous Buildings Case # 13-094 & 13-1480 RELATED PROJECT: N/A APPROVALS: N/A EXHIBITS: PowerPoint Presentation and File Photos to be presented at the Council meeting. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: Preliminary estimate is $10,000 - $15,000. AMOUNT BUDGETED: $175,000.00 Budgeted for all demolitions Citywide in the FY-2016 Budget FUNDING SOURCE (Dept./Page in CIP & Budget): 110-1600-534-30-33. TIMETABLE: As soon as possible. RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1. Declare this building and all accessory structures on this property dangerous. 2. Order the property demolished by August 13, 2015 by the owner or equity owner at their own risk. 3. Order the Building Inspector to cause the demolition of the structures if not completed by the owner within 10 days of the date established by City Council. 4. Order the City Manager with the assistance of the City Solicitor to cause the cost of repairs or demolition to be charged against the land on which the building exists as a municipal lien or cause such cost to be added to the tax duplicate as an assessment, or to be levied as a special tax, or to be recovered in a suit at law against the owner. BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS The property is owned by Mary Lou Bashore. The property is a two-story wood-framed single family home. The house has been vacant since January 11, 2013, and is registered with the City as a Vacant Building. The residential use is no longer permitted at this location, as the property is zoned M (Manufacturing). On January 15, 2014, the Board of Adjustment issued a variance to allow the continued residential use. This variance expired, as work did not commence and continue diligently within a year of the variance being granted. On May 7, 2014, staff from the Planning and Inspections Department condemned the home due to the numerous code violations. The owner was ordered to board the property in May of 2014. Currently the home is still vacant, with no utilities and numerous outstanding code violations.

ACTION FORM PROCEEDING: City Council DEPARTMENT OF ORIGIN: Planning & Inspections DATE SUBMITTED: 6-26-2015 PREPARED BY: Ann Marie Townshend, AICP, Director of Planning and Community Development SUBJECT: 311 N Governors Ave, Dover, Delaware – Violation of Dangerous Building Ordinance REFERENCE: Chapter 22, Article XI – Dangerous Buildings, Sec. 22-385 - Hearing before Council and Chapter 22, Article XI - Dangerous Buildings Case # 12-497 & 14-600 RELATED PROJECT: N/A APPROVALS: N/A EXHIBITS: PowerPoint Presentation and File Photos to be presented at the Council meeting. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: Preliminary estimate is $20,000 - $25,000. AMOUNT BUDGETED: $175,000.00 Budgeted for all demolitions Citywide in the FY-2016 BudgetFUNDING SOURCE (Dept./Page in CIP & Budget): 110-1600-534-30-33. TIMETABLE: As soon as possible. RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1. Declare this building and all accessory structures on this property dangerous. 2. Order the property repaired or demolished by August 13, 2015 by the owner or equity owner at their own risk. 3. Order the Building Inspector to cause the repair or demolition of the structures if not completed by the owner within 10 days of the date established by City Council. 4. Order the City Manager with the assistance of the City Solicitor to cause the cost of repairs or demolition to be charged against the land on which the building exists as a municipal lien or cause such cost to be added to the tax duplicate as an assessment, or to be levied as a special tax, or to be recovered in a suit at law against the owner. BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS The property is owned by Jean MacDonald. The property is a two-story wood-framed single family home. The house has been vacant since April 1, 2014, and is registered with the City as a Vacant Building. On April 3, 2014, staff from the Planning and Inspections Department condemned the home due to hoarding conditions within the home that are causing a excessive fire load to the structural members of the home . There are weak/loose floors around the rear door, laundry room and bathroom. The owner was ordered to obtain a structural engineers report and to remove items causing the excessive load . Currently the home is still vacant, with no utilities and numerous outstanding code violations.

DOVER HUMAN RELATIONS COMMISSION The Dover Human Relations Commission (DHRC) meeting was held on March 10, 2015 at 5:17 p.m. with Chairman Wilson presiding. Members present were Mr. Henderson, Mr. Roach, Mr. Ruane, Ms. Smith, Mrs. Sadusky, and Ms. Stewart. Mr. McGiffin and Ms. Hicks were absent. AGENDA ADDITIONS/DELETIONS Mr. Henderson moved for approval of the agenda as presented, seconded by Ms. Smith and unanimously carried. Presentation - Delaware Department of Justice, Office of Civil Rights and Public Trust Ms. Smith introduced Deputy Attorney General Allison Reardon and advised members that Ms. Reardon was recently appointed as Director of the Delaware Department of Justice Office of Civil Rights and Public Trust, noting that this Office was designed to be a safe haven where the public can go to understand their rights in terms of housing, education, employment, and many other areas, and is also to be an advocate when there is a conflict of interest between the Department of Justice and the public. Ms. Reardon advised members that she had been with the Department of Justice for 23 years, having started in the 1980s as a child support prosecutor. She stated that she went into private practice for approximately five (5) years and then returned to the State in a number of different capacities. Ms. Reardon indicated that she had worked with the State Human Relations Commission in the past and had also represented the Department of Labor, the Department of Finance, the Division of Professional Regulation, and a number of other State agencies. Ms. Reardon stated that Attorney General Matthew Denn selected her to head up the newly created Office of Civil Rights and Public Trust and she was focused on getting it started in the right direction. The Office was now staffed at the level that is anticipated for the foreseeable future with two (2) attorneys, Ms. Reardon and one (1) additional Deputy Attorney General, two (2) public outreach and research specialists, and three (3) investigators. Ms. Reardon stated her hope that the Office could now move forward doing the business that they are charged with, noting that complaints were starting to come in more frequently since the Office was becoming known. Ms. Reardon explained that the Office is responsible for various areas of statutory oversight, protecting the rights and liberties of Delawareans, and enforcement of related laws. It will be involved in discrimination cases, focusing on pattern and practice cases, and will not look at individual cases where there is already a place to have those concerns addressed, such as the Human Relations Commission and the Department of Labor. She advised members that the Office of Civil Rights and Public Trust refers people to appropriate government resources and is looking for referrals from the State Human Relations Commission, Dover Human Relations Commission, and other organizations that see pattern and practice type cases that her Office would take charge of. The Office will also look into protecting the educational rights of children with disabilities, although they had not yet officially started in that track, and will enforce the laws designed to ensure citizen trust in government, such as those pertaining to election and campaign finance violations and governing the use of public funds and public contact. She indicated that they had already seen some complaints involving elections, as well public funds and conduct. Ms. Reardon explained that they would also focus on criminal prosecution of State and municipal actors who violate the public trust by engaging in criminal conduct, such as theft and bribery. She noted that they would work in collaboration with

DOVER HUMAN RELATIONS COMMISSION MEETING OF MARCH 10, 2015 PAGE 2 a number of other agencies, including the Public Integrity Commission, the State Auditor, and the Election Commissioner, and indicated that the Office is in the process of scheduling meetings to meet with those various agencies and individuals to see how they can work together. Ms. Reardon explained that there might be an appearance of conflict if the Department has a prosecutorial role and relationship with an entity when conducting some investigations, for example, the use of deadly force by police officers, and this function of review had been shifted to the Office of Civil Rights and Public Trust. She advised members that she would be the person responsible for determining whether or not the use of force was justified, along with Chief Deputy Attorney General Danielle Gibbs. Ms. Reardon stated that she will write the associated reports and make decisions, which she indicated was an important issue and big responsibility that she would not take lightly. Having previously served in the Civil Division and as the former State Solicitor, Ms. Reardon stated that she provided legal advice to State agencies, noting that a State agency is often the subject of a criminal, ethics, or other violation. She noted that it is very difficult to be in the position of providing advice on both sides of the fence, and explained that the Office of Civil Rights and Public Trust would perform investigations, which would take away the conflict of interest that Justice Department attorneys often feel when they have to represent one (1) of the entities that is the subject of an investigation. Ms. Reardon informed members that her Office was also embarking on educational programs and hoped in the very near future to reach out to various organizations with common interests. For the past two (2) months, her staff had been talking with offices of civil rights in surrounding states to fold some of their experience into the developing Office. They had talked to such offices in Massachusetts and New York and were continuing to reach out to other states to benefit from their experiences and to further their mission of protecting civil rights and public trust. Ms. Reardon advised members that the Office’s webpage can be accessed through a link on the Delaware Attorney General’s website, and includes a contact information and an online complaint form. Noting that the 50th anniversary of the 1965 Voting Rights Act was approaching, Mr. Henderson expressed concern that it was currently difficult for people to vote. He noted that license renewal now requires a birth certificate and other things and felt that some people, including the elderly and those who are not organized, may experience difficulty with this. Mr. Henderson expressed concern that this is a civil rights issue driven by politics, noting that Delaware had fallen in line with this and that some licenses state that they are not a valid ID for government. He questioned what Ms. Reardon’s feelings were on this matter. Responding, Ms. Reardon stated that she had not looked into this specific issue or how it would affect people’s ability to vote. She stated her belief that a federally compliant driver's license is a federal requirement; however, she was glad that Mr. Henderson brought this matter to her Office’s attention. Ms. Smith requested clarification regarding Ms. Reardon’s request for DHRC commissioners to share cases with her relating to pattern and practices. In addition, she noted that Ms. Reardon had served as a former protector of State agencies, and indicated that solid relationships are built with such protectors. She asked that Ms. Reardon explain the process of what she had formerly done versus what she was now assigned to do.

DOVER HUMAN RELATIONS COMMISSION MEETING OF MARCH 10, 2015 PAGE 3 In regard to patterns and practices, Ms. Reardon stated that the Office was looking for certain situations. For example, she explained that if the DHRC received complaints that an apartment complex was routinely denying access to a particular race or gender, the Office would want to know about it. However, if one (1) person complained, they would be referred to the State Human Relations Commission to file a complaint and receive assistance. Ms. Reardon indicated that it would be helpful if the City or State Human Relations Commission reported to them if a number of similar cases builds up so it could be determined if this was a pattern and practice case. In regard to Ms. Smith’s question pertaining to the protection of State agencies, Ms. Reardon stated that she is responsible for issues pertaining to police shootings. She stated that she had never advised the police or worked with them on a daily basis in what they do as law enforcement officers, although attorneys under her supervision had worked with the State police and other police agencies; therefore, she felt that she could be independent in her assessment of situations. Ms. Reardon stated that it might be a little more difficult in a situation where a child has been abused in a State facility and this may have to be reviewed; however, she felt that protocols and laws would be in place. She would not be talking directly with the attorney representing that agency and would make her own assessment for her Office on the occurrence. She reminded members that the Office was still in its infancy and all protocols were not yet in place but were being worked on. Referring to Ms. Reardon’s comment about being involved with children with disabilities, Mr. Roach inquired if this pertained to mental health, school, or community issues. Responding, Ms. Reardon stated that they were looking at all types of complaints, for example, whether children with Individualized Education Programs (IEPs) were being treated fairly and if their concerns were being heard. She stated that the Office would be driven by what they hear from constituents and that these would also be issues pertaining to pattern and practice. Mr. Ruane questioned when the Office would become involved in issues related to use of excessive force by police. He indicated that in the past there had been a perception that some of the investigating parties within the Attorney General’s Office had entered into related decision making, perhaps because of their own groundwork with police. In response, Ms. Reardon stated that the Attorney General is sensitive to the fact that a number of investigators had developed relationships with police officers over the years. She explained that the investigators assigned to her Office would work exclusively with her Office and would not be on the ground with the police in other matters. She stated that if there were a police shooting and someone was injured or killed, an investigator would go to the scene, perform their own assessment and prepare a report for her, then she would issue a public report. Mr. Ruane questioned the level of involvement of the local police force and if it would be a routine practice for those cases to be moved up to the Attorney General’s level rather than being handled by the City police. Responding, Ms. Reardon indicated that a separate attorney who is not in an oversight position of personnel in the Criminal Division would now be involved in the review. She indicated that the Attorney General’s Office had held that oversight role in recent history, noting that they had monitored and written reports on shootings involving injury or death for years, and their website contains a number of related decisions rendered by former Chief of Staff Timothy Mullaney. She stated that this responsibility would now be shifted away from those who have a closer relationship with the police.

DOVER HUMAN RELATIONS COMMISSION MEETING OF MARCH 10, 2015 PAGE 4 Noting that Ms. Reardon had mentioned that she foresaw problems related to elections, Ms. Smith requested that she elaborate. Responding, Ms. Reardon stated that, historically, there had been complaints involving elections, for example, laws relating to electioneering within a certain perimeter. She stated that her Office would be charged with ensuring follow-up on those complaints. Mrs. Sadusky advised members that inmates in State prisons who feel they are being treated unfairly must address this within the prison or pay money for an outside lawyer. She explained that this may relate to issues such as prosecution for wrongful death or improper health care, and questioned if this was an issue that Ms. Reardon’s Office could address. Responding, Ms. Reardon stated that the Office’s role on that issue had not been explored and she was unsure if there were partner organizations that would be better suited for that. Mr. Ken Abraham, 430 Kings Highway, stated that he is a retired lawyer and serves as President of Citizens for Criminal Justice. He explained that he was familiar with the practice, pattern, and policy term, noting that it is a legal term that provides common sense meaning to a series of abuses or violations that might trigger an investigation under appropriate circumstances. Mr. Abraham questioned who the other deputy in the office was, and Ms. Reardon stated that it was Mr. Dennis Kelleher. Mr. Abraham stated that he wished to follow up on Ms. Sadusky’s question regarding prisons, noting that he had a good look at what goes on in the Delaware Department of Corrections (DOC) and there were serious problems in the State of Delaware. He indicated that he did not know what partner agencies Ms. Reardon was referring to and expressed his opinion that nobody was doing anything about the cesspool of crime that exists in Delaware, stating that he was not talking about the prisoners. He expressed his hope that Ms. Reardon’s Office would become involved. Mr. Abraham stated that he had contacted the U.S. Department of Justice, claiming a pattern, practice, and policy of serious abuse and criminal violations, and had received a form letter from them stating that they only investigate claims of pattern, practice, or policy, which were the very words he had used. Since that time, he stated that he had received three (3) such form letters in response to follow-up complaints. Mr. Abraham expressed his hope that the Office would do what it is designed to do and wished them success. Referring to Ms. Reardon’s comments regarding a lack public trust, Mr. Abraham stated his observation, based on being immersed in these matters over the last eight (8) years locally and nationwide, that the effect of the many problems in the criminal justice system, including prison abuse, was the erosion of public trust in government officials. He indicated his belief that Ronald Shoup, an inmate in the Delaware DOC, was murdered, explaining that the death certificate indicated homicide at the hands of DOC staff through blunt force trauma. Mr. Abraham inquired if a decision had been made on this matter. Mr. Reardon stated that she had previously responded to Mr. Abraham’s email regarding this matter and, as she indicated in that response, this was an active case and she could not comment on it. She stated that Mr. Abraham had emailed her this question repeatedly and that this would be her response to all such emails.

DOVER HUMAN RELATIONS COMMISSION MEETING OF MARCH 10, 2015 PAGE 5 Mr. Abraham stated that he would probably continue to send emails about once per month. Ms. Cynthia Smith, Felton, Delaware, questioned who protects whistle blowers from retaliation, how Ms. Reardon’s Office would be transparent in regard to cases being investigated, and if information would available on their website. Ms. Smith also expressed concerns with regard to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), stating that there were problems with a lack of transparency. She felt that there was a conflict of interest in Ms. Reardon’s Office and that if they were representing the public, they should use an outside, independent investigator so that there would not appear to be bias in the office. Ms. Smith expressed her opinion that law enforcement, social services, and the judiciary were three (3) important agencies that must work together. Ms. Smith indicated that false allegations should also be addressed. She stated the desire to avoid becoming another Ferguson, Missouri. She concurred with Ms. Reardon’s comments about patterns, stating the desire to know how much racial profiling is happening in Delaware and how many minority arrests. Ms. Smith felt it important to expose corruption and desired to leave the room knowing that there is protection, although she acknowledged the desire for transparency. Noting that she was a survivor of domestic abuse, she questioned what happened to funding in the Violence Against Women Act. Ms. Smith indicated that she had heard that Family Court wants a new building; however, she felt they should be merged together. Ms. Smith stated that the State actors are playing games with the people’s livelihood and families, and emphasized the importance of discipline, transparency, and oversight in the judiciary. Ms. Denise Tolliver, Camden, Delaware, stated that there was a series of rape cases in the Caesar Rodney School District spanning a number of years and questioned, when there is a pattern such as this, what the Office of Civil Rights and Public Trust would do to help the families in situations where the kids are systematically being abused by teachers. Responding, Ms. Reardon stated that this would cross over into a number of areas, including criminal prosecution and the Family Division to assist with children who are being abused. She felt that if a public school teacher was abusing a child, this would be an issue of public trust and would be looked at by her Office. Ms. Tolliver questioned what would cause the Office to act, since she estimated that the most recent case was less than three (3) months ago. In response, Ms. Reardon stated that she had been in this Office for two (2) months; therefore, she was not familiar with this case. Ms. Reardon explained that her Office is closely monitoring what is happening around them and there is nothing that would prevent them from opening their own inquiry into a matter, if they determine that it is appropriate. Ms. Tolliver questioned if a citizen could file a complaint on behalf of children if they are not involved in the actual crime. Ms. Reardon stated that if her Office cannot help the person who files a complaint, they would try to direct the complainant to the appropriate resource, such as Family Court or the Family or Criminal Divisions of the Attorney General’s Office. She reiterated that she did not know all the answers and was still learning. Ms. Tolliver questioned the composition of Ms. Reardon’s team in terms of ethnic background and diversity. In response, Ms. Reardon stated that there are two (2) women, one (1) of her investigators is an African American female, and there are four (4) white males. Ms. Tolliver suggested greater diversity in the office. Ms. Reardon agreed and stated that they would continue to build this as positions are added.

DOVER HUMAN RELATIONS COMMISSION MEETING OF MARCH 10, 2015 PAGE 6 Mr. Raymond Paylor, Dover, questioned what the steps in the complaint process are once a complaint is accepted by the Office of Civil Rights and Public Trust. Responding, Ms. Reardon stated that constituents are initially directed to file an online complaint form and two (2) public outreach and research specialists work with them to pool together as much information as they can. The complaint is then assessed by one (1) of the attorneys to determine whether or not it is something that is within the responsibilities of the Office and what needs to be done. Chairman Wilson expressed thanks to Ms. Reardon for enlightening members on the mission of the newly created Office and stated his hope that they would be effective in Dover and throughout the State. Presentation - Downtown Development District Incentives Mr. William Neaton, Economic Development Manager, reviewed a presentation regarding the City of Dover Downtown Development District (DDD) (Attachment #1), which included information pertaining to the program incentives. Mr. Neaton informed members that this was one (1) of the most important revitalization efforts in the history of the downtown area. He explained that approximately one (1) year ago, Governor Markell added $7M the budget to revitalize downtown districts. The legislation was approved unanimously by the General Assembly in June 2014 and it was determined that three (3) cities in Delaware would be designated to utilize these funds for both large projects, with over $250,000 being invested, and small projects, involving investment under $250,000. There was an extensive application process and cities had to show the need and impact of the funds for the downtown area, develop a district plan demonstrating how the funds would be used, and develop additional local incentives above and beyond what the State was suggesting. Mr. Neaton advised members that applications were reviewed by a cabinet committee and by the State Planning Office. The City of Dover's 300-page plan drew on two (2) plans that the City had utilized in the past: 1) the Dover Transit Center Neighborhood Plan and 2) the Restoring Central Dover Plan. He explained that the Dover Transit Center Neighborhood Plan was developed in partnership with the Dover/Kent County Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) approximately six (6) years ago, and involves the area surrounding the Transit Center on Queen and Water Streets as well as the downtown area. In reference to the Restoring Central Dover Plan, Mr. Neaton stated that a $75,000 planning grant was received from Wells Fargo, with the National Council on Agricultural Life and Labor Research (NCALL) as the lead agency. Numerous partners were involved in this initiative, including the Downtown Dover Partnership (DDP), faith-based participants, and the City of Dover. He stated that many good things came out of this plan, which was completed in the Fall of 2014, and an application had been submitted to reapply for an implementation grant. Mr. Neaton stated that on January 11, 2015, Governor Markell announced District Designations for the cities of Wilmington, Seaford, and Dover. Mr. Neaton explained that this was a ten-year designation; therefore, it would be a long-term fix and Dover would be able to apply for funding for ten years. He stated his understanding that the Governor would recommend another round of $7M for the upcoming budget year.

DOVER HUMAN RELATIONS COMMISSION MEETING OF MARCH 10, 2015 PAGE 7 Mr. Neaton informed members that the Dover DDD includes 220 acres in the Central Business District and adjacent neighborhoods. He explained that this area has an 84% rental rate and stated the need to balance this with more owner-occupied housing. Mr. Neaton stated that Dover’s plan has two (2) revitalization components, a residential component and a commercial component. He noted that this is a high-crime area with 49 vacant buildings in the District. Mr. Neaton stated that the City was looking at strengthening code enforcement throughout the City, especially in this area. He advised that 25 buildings that did not meet code requirements had been demolished, nine (9) additional buildings were considered dangerous, and part of the revitalization would target these buildings. Mr. Neaton explained that incentives would include cash rebates on construction costs, fee waivers, tax abatements and credits, historic tax abatements and credits, and facade improvement and architectural grants. Mr. Neaton explained, for example, that an applicant with a $100,000 commercial remodeling project would pay $25,000 out of pocket and would be eligible for a 20% cash rebate from the State on the remaining $75,000, which would amount to $15,000. In addition, Kent County had allocated $200,000 to match all incentives up to $10,000; therefore, the applicant would receive a total of $25,000 in State and County rebates. In regard to City incentives, Mr. Neaton stated that building permit fees as well as sewer and water impact fees would be waived for DDD approved projects. He explained that the City’s water and sewer impact fees are $4,000 for each equivalent dwelling unit (EDU), and a building constructed with two (2) bathrooms would have two (2) EDUs, amounting to $8,000 in water and sewer impact fees which would be waived. In addition, business license fees for new businesses would be waived for three (3) years in the DDD. The City would also rebate transfer fees once a certificate of occupancy is obtained for a building that is being purchased and remodeled. In regard to tax benefits, Mr. Neaton informed members that the City would provide tax abatement on the value of improvements for ten years. As an example, he explained that if an owner of a building with a tax base of $200,000 completed $100,000 worth of improvements, typically the tax base would increase to $300,000; however, with this incentive, the City would continue to use $200,000 as the tax base for ten years. Mr. Neaton stated that there are also State historic preservation tax credits and City tax credits for historic properties. Referring to homeownership incentives, Mr. Neaton stated that the City was offering a five (5) year phase-in for property taxes for owner-occupied homes in the DDD. In addition transfer taxes would be waived for first-time homebuyers in the DDD. Mr. Neaton explained that the City has had a down payment assistance program for first-time homebuyers for many years. He stated that on March 9, 2015, the Parks, Recreation, and Community Enhancement Committee had recommended that City Council approve $60,000 to continue this program through Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funding. Mr. Neaton indicated that the Downtown Dover Partnership (DDP) was offering funding for architectural design assistance. He explained that the DDP would fund 100% of the first $1,000 used for this purpose and would provide a 50% match for additional fees up to $5,000. It was hoped that this would assist new owners in bringing buildings up to code. Mr. Neaton stated that the DDP had

DOVER HUMAN RELATIONS COMMISSION MEETING OF MARCH 10, 2015 PAGE 8 a facade improvement program for a number of years and would provide rebates for this purpose as well. In addition, he noted that the Sustainable Energy Utility was reducing the cost of energy audits from approximately $400 to $50 and would also provide rebates for energy efficiency improvements. Mr. Neaton reiterated that strong code enforcement was needed to make sure that buildings are brought up to code. Mr. Neaton reviewed an example of the value of incentives for a sample project with an initial construction cost of $350,000, noting that this project would qualify for incentives valued at $147,034, which would be approximately 40% of the cost. He noted that the expectation was that this would result in developers bringing forward projects that were previously postponed and starting development downtown. Mr. Kirby Hudson, Assistant City Manager, advised members that two (2) workshops were scheduled for March 11, 2015 at 11:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. which would provide more detailed information regarding the DDD program. He indicated that three (3) similar workshops were held last month and attendance averaged 40 people; therefore, approximately 140 developers and investors had come to see the types of redevelopment incentives being offered in downtown Dover. Mr. Hudson expressed his feeling that a key component of making the project work was cleaning up the area. He felt that all of the incentives and programs to spur development and redevelopment would not mean a thing unless this is done. Members were provided a flyer to be distributed to encourage residents to perform basic property maintenance for spring (Attachment #2). Mr. Hudson noted that the flyer provided a synopsis of the types of code violations that code enforcement staff would be looking at. Mr. Hudson advised members that he was the former City Manager for the Town of Cobleskill, New York. He indicated that he was new to the City of Dover; however, he quickly realized that there are a number of properties in the DDD in major disarray, reiterating that 84% of the properties were rental units, and there were 49 vacant buildings and 25 vacant lots that have become havens for dumping. Mr. Hudson stated that residents must be held accountable for bringing these properties up to code. He advised that the City would like to start a campaign and let everyone know in advance that Dover was fortunate enough to be designated as one (1) of three (3) cities to receive this opportunity. He stated that the City would use this to its advantage, and for those people who did not want to clean up their act, the City would help them to do so. Mr. Hudson stated that this would be done fairly, consistently, and by the book. Mr. Ruane questioned if owners of multiple rental units had been identified and been given an invitation to meet with the City to incentivize them, so that there would be direct targeting of some of the ownership, rather than a general invitation. Mr. Ruane stated that he would like to see those people who are used to getting away with doing the wrong thing being targeted. In response, Mr. Neaton stated that in one (1) instance a person who has owned numerous properties had come to the City and met with the City Manager, the Assistant City Manager, the Director of Planning and Community Development, and Mr. Neaton to discuss what they could do to upgrade and how these incentives would impact them. Mr. Neaton indicated that he did not know how many property owners own multiple locations but assumed that there were a number of them.

DOVER HUMAN RELATIONS COMMISSION MEETING OF MARCH 10, 2015 PAGE 9 Mr. Ruane strongly suggested getting this into place because he felt that individuals would make the effort to make improvements; however, in the past there were difficulties with those who own multiple properties. Mr. Henderson stated that Mr. Matt Haley had planned to do quite a bit for Dover, including putting in a restaurant, before tragically being killed. He asked if that situation had been addressed. In addition, he questioned if there would be gentrification in the DDD and expressed concern about the poor, transient, and non-home owners in the area and where they would go if the area is upgraded. Mr. Hudson explained that, by the broken window theory, properties that are in disarray, with boarded houses, broken windows, and abandoned cars, are the most targeted for criminal activity. He indicated that this program would do two (2) things: 1) bring local and out-of-town people to look at incentives throughout the State, County, and City, so that they would know the area is open for redevelopment business; and 2) clean up the area, which would also help to take care of some of the crime. If a property is picked up and remains clean, facade improvements are made, and new lighting is installed, this would demonstrate that people care about their property and criminal activity would move to another area. Mr. Hudson felt that if the root of the problem is not taken care of, efforts would only amount to putting cosmetics on the problem. He stated that property owners must be made to maintain properties and they were not being asked to do anything beyond what a normal person would do. Mr. Henderson stated that most of the people who live in this area cannot afford property and that he respected broken areas because he grew up in broken areas. He asked that the City look after the needs of the people who will be displaced, and suggested trying to keep those who live outside of the District from building liquor stores in the community, as well as stores that have no nutrition and sell no vegetables to children. He stated that some people have no choice but to buy these items because that is all that is available. Mr. Henderson stated that it was easier to put up a liquor store than a church in this community. Responding, Mr. Hudson stated that there is a list of businesses that are not allowed or eligible for funding, including tattoo parlors, liquor stores, gentleman’s clubs, etc. Mr. Scott Koenig, City Manager stated that gentrification had been discussed and that it was important to lay the groundwork to avoid that reality. He stated that in this area of the City, there would either be progress and people would want to live and do business there, or it would become the hollow heart of the City. Mr. Koenig advised members that nothing good is happening on vacant property and in vacant buildings from a community standpoint. He stated that this is a difficult subject because, as people come in and refurbish, rebuild, or build new structures, gentrification is an accusation that will have to be dealt with. Mr. Koenig indicated that the question is how to develop a full palette of affordable housing or offer pathways for homeowners who may not have economic backgrounds or means to keep their property or maintain it in the future. Mr. Koenig stated that the program does not provide all the answers. He noted that some property owners had attended the workshops and questioned what would be done for them; however, this program, as set up, was not the answer to their questions. These individuals would have to be directed to other programs or opportunities, and this had been discussed at the staff level.

DOVER HUMAN RELATIONS COMMISSION MEETING OF MARCH 10, 2015 PAGE 10 In response to Mr. Ruane’s question regarding multiple property owners, Mr. Koenig stated that strategies were being developed internally to address those owners with whom the City has had difficulty in the past. He noted that the DDD designation was received in early January, only eight (8) weeks ago. Mr. Koenig advised that the positive promotion campaign was being done right now. He stated that it was important to get the projects moving forward, the interest level up, and projects in the queue at the State because, in some ways, this is a competition for $7M of State money to be directed to the private sector. Mr. Koenig reminded members that the City or State cannot make application for these projects and it is not money that is in the City’s coffer, noting that the City incentives actually take away potential revenue from the City. He explained that this is a long-term strategy to redevelop, refurbish, and reinvigorate this area of the City and there would not be not an instantaneous economic benefit to the City. Mr. Koenig explained that if the City did not promote and get this program moving, the City would be incurring a lot of costs for code enforcement, policing, and other things that are not necessarily contributing to the overall community. He reiterated that the program was in its early stages and there had been staff-level discussions about developing public strategies for addressing concerns and getting buy-in from the community and groups like the DHRC that this is a good program for the City. Mr. Koenig indicated that there would be some potentially unintended consequences to adjust for as the program is implemented. Mr. Koenig emphasized that the objective was not to push the problem somewhere else, so that at the end of the 10-year designation these 220 acres would be doing we1l, but things would be made worse immediately outside of the 220 acres. He stated the need for the DHRC and community organizations to understand that there are some potential negative effects and a need to figure out strategies on how to mitigate them and to achieve the goals of the entire palette; commercial, residential, low-to-moderate income, and potentially low-income housing, so that those who deserve to be there would not be pushed out. Mr. Henderson stated that this was exactly what he wished to hear. Mr. Ruane stated that one (1) of the purposes of the DHRC is to promote diversity and social inclusion and he felt that all of the commissioners would be supportive of a program like this. He reassured Mr. Koenig that the questioning should not be seen as negative or discouraging. He felt that the program was an attempt to improve the economic program in the City and to provide better housing, which are goals that the DHRC supports. He felt that this was a good program and that the DHRC would like to support it. Mr. Koenig stated that City staff had not known how to work with the Commission on common subjects; however, that staff needed the DHRC’s help and was asking for it by providing the presentation. He indicated that staff would like continued dialogue, advice, and ideas coming from the Commission to help to make this a successful plan. Mr. Koenig stated that when the City went to the cabinet committee on State Planning for its application, one (1) of the strong points of the application was the City’s organizational capacity to make the plan successful. Several background plans had been completed with ideas and potential solutions to problems. In the application, the City was also brutally honest in stating that in this 220 acres there has been a high crime problem, a high

DOVER HUMAN RELATIONS COMMISSION MEETING OF MARCH 10, 2015 PAGE 11 rental rate problem, and a desire for additional home ownership. Mr. Koenig felt that these were goals that the DHRC would have for this community and expressed the desire to use the DHRC to partner in making this a successful program. Commissioner Smith stated her agreement; however, she felt it important to understand the strategy, stating her feeling that the strategy was not completely laid out. She referenced Mr. Henderson’s concern regarding a group of people that will be displaced and would have to move elsewhere. She felt it important to understand what is being endorsed before endorsing it. She suggested that this might mean having a conversation and helping to support staff in creating that strategy. Ms. Smith explained that she has a former client who is a contractor that has built many of these properties throughout the State and kept them affordable and is very familiar with how to navigate these difficult waters, and perhaps someone like that could be brought to the table. Speaking for herself, she stated that she did not want to back something that she was unclear on, or that those who are moving it forward are unclear on. Ms. Stewart inquired if any projects had come forward yet. Responding, Mr. Koenig advised that the projects are submitted directly to the State. Mr. Neaton stated that one (1) large project, in excess of $250,000, had been submitted and staff was currently working with half a dozen other projects. He explained that those applying for small projects will perform the renovations and repairs, and then submit their expenses to the Delaware State Housing Authority. Applicants for larger projects must submit a reservation for funds and those reservations would be due on March 20, 2015. Mr. Ruane questioned if there is a citizens advisory group, including residents, associated with the program. Responding, Mr. Koenig stated that there was not and that staff was looking for advice on how to get the correct messages out to the development community and the community in general. He noted that these things must be discussed because, while staff may think that the message is clear and correct, it may have to be adjusted if something is missing. Chairman Wilson suggested holding a special DHRC meeting to discuss this issue in terms of strategies. He stated his feeling that it would be a good move to clean up the entire City, not just that target area. He indicated that clarity is extremely important and the idea of defining strategies that will not overlap one another, as far as the what the DHRC was doing versus the City and any other group within the City. He was in favor of Mr. Ruane’s suggestion to have a group of people that represents the community be part of the initiative, noting the importance of hearing from those in the target area so they know what is going on and for transparency. Mr. Ruane informed members that the DHRC Government Policy, Programs, and Practices Committee would have their first meeting with a group of senior City employees to begin examining the City’s organization in terms of the status of its diversity and its role in promoting diversity and social inclusion in the Dover community on Friday, March 13, 2015, from 2:00 to 3:00 p.m. in the City Hall Conference Room. Mr. Wilson expressed his hope that many of the Commissioners could attend this important meeting.

DOVER HUMAN RELATIONS COMMISSION MEETING OF MARCH 10, 2015 PAGE 12 Mr. Henderson moved for adjournment, seconded by Mr. Roach and unanimously carried. Meeting adjourned at 6:42 p.m. Cecil C. Wilson Chairman CCW/TM/js/dd S:\AGENDAS-MINUTES-PACKETS-PRESENTATIONS-ATT&EXH\Misc-Minutes\HUMAN RELATIONS COMMISSION\2015\03-10-2015 Dover Human Relations Commission.wpd Attachments Attachment #1 - Presentation - City of Dover Downtown Development District Attachment #2 - Flyer - Basic Property Maintenance for Spring

ATTACHMENT #1 DHRC COMMITTEE MEETING 03/10/2015 ATTACHMENT #1 DHRC COMMITTEE MEETING 3/10/2015

ATTACHMENT #2 DHRC COMMITTEE MEETING 03/10/2015

SAFETY ADVISORY AND TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE The Safety Advisory and Transportation Committee Meeting was held on June 22, 2015 at 4:00 p.m. with Chairman Hosfelt presiding. Members present were Mr. Hutchison, Mr. Sudler, and Mr. Keller. Mr. Shelton was absent. Members of Council present were Mr. Anderson (arrived at 4:13 p.m.), Mr. Neil, Mr. Cole, Mr. Hare (arrived at 5:07 p.m.), and Mr. Slavin (arrived at 4:17 p.m.). AGENDA ADDITIONS/DELETIONS Mr. Hutchison moved for approval of the agenda, seconded by Mr. Sudler and unanimously carried. Discussion - Proposed Committee to Study the Basic Life Safety (BLS) Needs for the City of Dover During the Safety Advisory and Transportation Committee meeting held on April 27, 2015, members evaluated proposals for the ambulance service contract. Mr. Scott Koenig, City Manager, advised members that Council had ultimately voted to extend and renew the Prime Care, LLC contract through June 30, 2018. During the discussions, a member of the Safety Advisory and Transportation Committee suggested creating a committee to study issues such as procedures and protocols, service delivery, and equipment needs to incorporate in the next request for proposals for ambulance services, which Mr. Koenig stated would take place close to 2017. Mr. Koenig advised members that City Council would be considering an Authorization to Execute Agreement to Perform a Comprehensive Analysis of Police, Fire, and EMS Services for the City of Dover during their meeting scheduled later in the evening. He explained that some recommendations regarding BLS may come out of that study, although BLS would be a relatively small component of the study. Responding to Mr. Hutchison regarding internal mechanisms in place, Mr. Koenig explained that complaints are usually filed in writing with the Emergency Management Coordinator. Moving forward with the current and next budget years, he stated that there would be a file of complaints, remedies, and ultimate disposition which would be monitored to determine best practices for handling such situations. Mr. Koenig noted that this information would not be published, as it is considered to be private, unless specifically requested. Request for Three-way Stop at the Intersection of Dwight Court and George Washington Drive Mr. Christopher Rupp, 1203 Woodrow Court, advised members that a request was submitted to put in a three (3) way stop sign between Dwight Court and George Washington Drive, stating that there are currently no stop signs at this location and, as a result, drivers speed through. Mr. Rupp expressed concern for the safety of people in that area, particularly young children, and suggested that putting a three (3) way stop sign in place may cut down on some of the speeding. Responding to Mr. Hutchison, Mr. Rupp stated that he had not had contact with the Police Department regarding this matter. Mr. Rupp noted that the topic was discussed with a neighborhood watch representative who mentioned putting a policeman at that location, but that was a year ago and this was not done.

SAFETY ADVISORY AND TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 2 Mr. Hutchison suggested reaching out to the Dover Police Department to ask that officers patrol the area and provide a recommendation on the best way to address the issue. Mr. Scott Koenig, City Manager, indicated that the amount of traffic occurring at this intersection, from an engineering standpoint, would not support the installation of a three (3) or four (4) way stop. However, Mr. Koenig stated that the City had installed stop signs in areas of the City that may have not warranted it from an engineering aspect in the past because a community had submitted a petition that identified a need, and this was agreed upon by all the residents around the stop sign. Mr. Koenig stated that, often, once a stop sign is in place, there are complaints that people are running the stop sign. Then the Dover Police Department will ticket people who violate the stop sign; however, these are typically people that live in and around the area. He reiterated the importance that all members of the community be in agreement. In response to Mr. Sudler regarding an alternative solution, Mr. Koenig stated that people simply need to obey the speed limit. He explained that a lot of money is spent to put up three (3) and four (4) way stops signs and for policemen to patrol due to a relatively small group of people that are creating a major inconvenience for these neighborhoods, but this often does not remedy the issue long term. He said if the community wants a stop sign put in place and will support it and obey it, 80% of the problem is solved; however, if the majority does not adhere to the rules once signage is in place, it is not effective. Major Marvin Mailey, Deputy Police Chief, stated that the Police Department can increase police enforcement in that area which, once in place, usually improves the driving habits there. He concurred with Mr. Koenig that often the individuals in violation are those who live in the community where the street sign is put in place. Deputy Chief Mailey stated that he made note of Mr. Rupp’s complaint and would forward the information to the rest of the Police Department to be addressed. Responding to Mr. Hosfelt, Deputy Chief Mailey advised that the Special Enforcement Unit could do a speed survey on George Washington Drive, which may help as well. Mr. Hosfelt explained that a speed survey can give an indication of the average rate of travel on the road, which could help identify the best way to address the problem. Responding to Mr. Hosfelt, Mr. Rupp said he would be agreeable to a speed survey. Proposed 15 MPH Speed Limits for Alley Ways Mr. Hosfelt explained that Councilman Cole, Third District, had proposed a 15-mph speed limit for alley ways within the City of Dover. Ms. Paula Kinsey, Owner of Tea for Two, 224 North State Street, advised members that her garage is located approximately four (4) feet from an alley and explained that on numerous occasions she scarcely avoided collisions in the alley. She stated concern for the safety of children that ride bikes in the alley ways. Ms. Kinsey expressed her opinion that the speed limit should be 10 mph to provide drivers enough reaction time to stop at a short distance and to allow residents to move about

SAFETY ADVISORY AND TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 3 safely, as well as pedestrians, college students, and patrons of The Grocery Basket. Ms. Kinsey also noted that as a result of a house in the vicinity being torn down, a short cut was created which caused an increase in foot traffic in the alley, noting that pedestrians often appear to be intoxicated, adding another element of concern for pedestrians and drivers. Mr. Paul Olsen, 301 North State Street, supported Ms. Kinsey’s comments. He stated that he lives across the street from Ms. Kinsey and noted that approximately a year ago, Council approved a stop sign in the alley in the back of his house, which immensely reduced the speed of travel. Prior to that however, Mr. Olsen noted that a person was hit in the alley and he expressed support for whatever action could be taken. Mrs. Kathie Siler, 229 North State Street, expressed her concurrence with Ms. Kinsey, supporting her request to place a 10 mph speed limit in the alley. She stated that she had lived on North State Street for 30 years and recalled a child being hit in the alley and that the homeowner that she purchased the property from was nearly struck as well. She concurred with Mr. Olsen that the posting of a stop sign had been extremely helpful. Mrs. Siler stated that there are a great number of pedestrians that utilize the alley, including children walking home from school, people walking their dogs, etc., and that, with the way the alley is situated and how the garages are placed, the visibility is very poor, leaving very little time to react when traveling beyond 10 mph. She concurred that many people look at the alleys as short cuts and felt that posting signs would be helpful. Ms. Susan Yost, 11 Cecil Street, stated that she also lives on the same alley as Tea for Two, which is between State and Bradford Streets, and expressed her agreement with the previous speakers. She shared her concern regarding speeding through the alley and the danger it poses to herself, children, and dogs. Responding to Ms. Yost, Mr. Hosfelt stated his belief that the speed limit was 25 mph in a residential district. Ms. Sarah Herbert, 223 North Bradford Street, stated that her step-daughter's vehicle was totaled by someone traveling in the alley approximately three (3) years ago, indicating a high rate of speed. She also pointed out that the “Watch for Children” sign in the alley was not placed where it could easily be viewed and this was the total signage in the alley. Ms. Herbert explained that it had been suggested that the residents place their trash cans out further to cause drivers to slow down; however, residents had not done so. Ms. Herbert stated she had written to area residents to ask them to send her their concerns, and there were issues that go far beyond the alley ways. People had expressed concerns regarding arrows pointing in the wrong direction on North State Street, drivers ignoring signs to stop for pedestrian, etc. She stated that signs should be posted low enough so that those speeding by could see them. She reiterated the need for a clear solution to the problems with alleys. Ms. Herbert said that she would provide information regarding the issues brought to her attention by the community to Councilman Cole and that members could review them.

SAFETY ADVISORY AND TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 4 Ms. Janice Gaddis, 448 North State Street, stated that although speeding was not an issue in her neighborhood, she grew up in Chicago where most homes had garages in the alley, not driveways. She recalled stop signs being posted in the alleys and expressed her thought that the speed limit must have been less than 25 mph. State Representative Sean Lynn, 224 Columbia Avenue, advised the Committee that he had received a number of complaints about this topic, including the lists of constituents and respective emails that had been provided to Councilmen Cole and Neil. Representative Lynn asked the Committee to consider this information and find a way to provide some relief to the constituents. Ms. Lynn Gold, 222 North State Street, expressed her support for everything that had been verbalized regarding this topic. She pointed out that accountability was also an issue, stating that if the City were not accountable for enforcing the limits, they have no impact. Ms. Gold suggested speed bumps, stating that this would require less enforcement because people would either have to stop or wreck their cars. Mr. Hutchison stated that the City does not utilize speed bumps because of fire apparatus and paramedics; however, he felt there were alternative solutions. He assured those present that he shared the safety concerns that were expressed. Mr. Cole expressed his appreciation to Mr. Hosfelt for placing this topic on the agenda and thanked the residents of the Third District for attending the meeting and voicing their concerns. Mr. Koenig advised that the City’s code indicates that the speed limit is 25 mph unless otherwise posted and expressed his uncertainty as to whether this would prevent the City from reducing the speed limit to 15 or 10 mph. Mr. Koenig stated that the City has about 16 miles of alleys, and if signs were posted they would be needed at the beginning and likely at the end of each alley, and it was his belief that some posting would be needed in the alleys, which would be difficult from an operational standpoint. He stated that there are obstacles that may pose issues regarding posting and visibility because of the way the alleys are laid out. In addition, the cooperation of property owners would be needed to post signs since some of the alleys are not paved according to property lines. Mr. Koenig advised that alleys in the City are supposed to be 16 feet wide; however, in some cases may be slightly wider or narrower, which would ultimately require signage on private property. Mr. Koenig stated that some people had expressed concerns that alleys were very narrow, and noted that putting up a sign would further narrow the area, creating problems for larger vehicles. He indicated that it would be essential to consider these types of issues when determining if and where signs should be posted and it would take some time to accomplish. Mr. Koenig requested, if the City moved forward with this, that staff be given direction on a location for a pilot project to be tested before going City-wide with it. In response to Mr. Hosfelt regarding whether there would be a difference in enforcement level if speed limits were reduced, Major Marvin Mailey, Deputy Police Chief, stated that 25 mph was faster than it should be, noting that streets with greater visibility and clearance for vehicles have a 25 mph speed limit. He concurred that alleys are tight, have blind spots, and a lot of opportunity for

SAFETY ADVISORY AND TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 5 accidents. Deputy Chief Mailey stated that he did not oppose the drop in the speed limit and confirmed Mr. Koenig’s statement that Delaware law would require posting at the beginning and end of the speed zone. This would present a problem with enforcement because of the area where officers would have to be stationed to enforce the speed limits. He indicated that if the Department could get its officers out there to enforce the limits safely, they would do so. At the request of Mr. Hosfelt, Deputy Chief Mailey said he would ask the Special Enforcement Unit commander to look into this and perhaps provide some information to the Committee and Mr. Koenig regarding what had been done in other cities or locations in relation to this issue. In response to Mr. Sudler regarding how a reduction in speed limit would affect enforcement, Deputy Chief Mailey stated that, with the many tasks the Police Department has, alleys are not at the top of the priority list, especially considering that the Department is functioning with 88 officers, which was well below manpower standards. He indicated that speed in alleys had not been monitored in some time. Responding to Mr. Cole regarding the requirements for posting, Deputy Chief Mailey stated that the operator must be given due notice of the posted speed so they can decelerate and come within the guidelines. It would have to be posted at the entrances at each end, unless it was a one (1) direction alley. In response to Mr. Cole’s question as to whether an ordinance could be established declaring that all alleys within the City have a 15 mph speed limit, Deputy Chief Mailey stated that this would be a matter for the City Solicitor to address. Mr. Cole advised members that many states had declared a 15 mph speed limit for alley ways throughout their jurisdictions unless otherwise posted and suggested this may be a possibility. At Mr. Hosfelt’s request, Deputy Chief Mailey agreed to research this possibility with the City Solicitor. Ms. Sarah Herbert, 223 North Bradford Street, reiterated that she had provided a list of constituent concerns to Mr. Cole, noting that one (1) of the suggestions was to educate the City regarding pedestrian laws, possibly through the newspaper and schools. She felt that pedestrians do not know what to do on walkways and alleys. Council President Slavin suggested that a motion be made to request staff to begin the process of preparing an ordinance as part of Deputy Chief Mailey’s research. Mr. Hutchison moved to refer this matter to staff for review and recommendation to be followed up at the Committee’s next monthly meeting, seconded by Mr. Sudler and unanimously carried. Discussion - Increased Criminal Activity - Lincoln Park Subdivision Mr. Stanley Richardson, 126 Reese Street, addressed the Committee about a group home located behind his residence. He stated that the facility had been there for a few years but had taken a significant downward turn in the last year and a half. He cited a recent incident where he had to have

SAFETY ADVISORY AND TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 6 one (1) of the group home residents arrested for trespassing and threatening to destroy his property and blow his head off shortly after a shooting that took place in the neighborhood. Mr. Richardson stated that the individual was later arrested. Subsequent to that, the director of the facility advised Mr. Richardson that a fence was scheduled to be put in place; however, this did not occur. Additionally, Mr. Richardson stated that he was told that he would be made aware when the individual who threatened him was released from jail but this did not occur. He was then told that this individual would be present no longer than a week; however, he was still currently present after three (3) weeks. Mr. Richardson spoke of another incident where a resident of a group home on Bradford Street threw a brick at a neighbor’s windshield and rocks at her car, and who also went to jail. Mr. Richardson stated that something needed to be done about the group home. He indicated that it was said that residents are mentally handicapped; however, based on having worked for the prison system for 27 years, in Mr. Richardson’s experience, prisoners who wanted to be moved to a more private or more relaxed area of the prison would claim to have mental problems. Mr. Richardson felt that those types of individuals were being released to group homes. Mr. Richardson stated that he was informed by a fellow prison retiree who was working with Connections Community Support Programs, Inc., the organization that runs the group home near Mr. Richardson, that inmates were being picked up and put into group homes without screening. He expressed his understanding that this organization was mainly concerned about the $1,500 that they receive per day per resident and they are not paid if these homes are unoccupied. Mr. Richardson said Connections has two (2) other locations in Dover, one (1) of which housed a sex offender until the community protested this individual’s presence, at which time this person was moved out. Mr. Richardson questioned the types of disabilities the individuals being housed at the group home have and expressed his feeling that many do not have a mental disability and are only looking for a place to be housed. Mr. Richardson advised members that he is fearful in his own home and does not feel safe running his lawn care business, stating that he feels he is in a vulnerable position when he is performing tasks like lying down in his driveway while sharpening blades for his lawn care business in his driveway. He noted that when he cuts the grass of Ms. Gloria Gardner, 115 Bertrand Street, next door to the group home, one (1) of the residents gives him dirty looks. Mr. Richardson stated that he had been told that three (3) more group homes were popping up on Saulsbury Road and Forrest Avenue next to the Subway Restaurant. Mr. Richardson suggested that the City notify the neighborhood when approval is sought for a group home. He mentioned again the shooting that took place and expressed his frustrations that no one is speaking up to help the Dover Police Department identify the shooter. In regard to the recent shooting that he mentioned previously, Mr. Richardson advised that he and Detective Woods of the Dover Police Department attempted to obtain information from the father of one of the possible individuals involved who originally stated that he did not know the names of anyone involved, only their nicknames. When pressed for the nicknames after being told the Police Department could likely identify them based on a known nickname, the individual was no longer willing to cooperate or provide any information. Mr. Richardson stated that the same individual whose name the neighbor refused to provide a nickname for, was later arrested, along with

SAFETY ADVISORY AND TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 7 some other individuals as a result of an incident at Dover Downs. Mr. Richardson thought that there were weapons in the residence of the individual, referring to a shooting that took place eight (8) months ago that the same individual was involved in. Responding to Mr. Hosfelt, Mr. Richardson stated that the individual he was referring to regarding the shooting was not connected with the group home; however, Mr. Richardson felt something needed to be done about both situations because they were both problems and posed a danger to the neighborhood. In response to Mr. Hosfelt, Mr. Richardson stated that he had called the Dover Police Department on numerous occasions and encouraged his neighbors to do the same. He noted that the Dover Police Department does a good job but more needs to be done about the group home and the violence in the neighborhood. Ms. Gloria Gardner, 115 Bertrand Drive, expressed her concurrence with Mr. Richardson’s concerns regarding the health-related group home next door, which opened approximately one (1) year ago. Ms. Gardner stated that when the home first opened, there were no problems with the residents as most of them were wheelchair-bound patients; however, recently, those types of individuals had been replaced by young 19 and 20-year-old men. Ms. Gardner noted specifically that starting on May 21, 2015 the police were called to that location four (4) times in one (1) week, and she no longer feels it is safe for her children to play in the yard. Ms. Gardner added that a couple of weeks ago she observed a young man using a brick to break a window in the group home and was later advised by one of the group’s counselors that the windshield of Ms. Gardner’s car had been broken out of her car and her car had dents from bricks. Her concern was this kind of damage, as well as the physical damage that could be caused to her, her children, or her grandchildren. Ms. Gardner suggested that the facility adopt some kind of screening process for the types of patients that are approved to be housed at the group home. Ms. Gardner shared her understanding that in some cases if someone wants to build something in a neighborhood, a petition would be distributed to the members of the neighborhood to allow them the opportunity to give or deny their permission. She indicated that she was shocked to find that a medical facility was approved next to her house in a residential neighborhood with no one’s knowledge until they started bringing patients in. She asked to be informed what the ordinance or requirement was for this. Responding, Mr. Hosfelt advised Ms. Gardner that her question would be brought to the attention of City staff to be answered. Mrs. Gardner stated that she thought it was very unsafe, noting that she had been in this house for approximately 35 years and she felt that serious changes needed to be made. In response to Mr. Anderson, Ms. Gardner stated that she believed the address of the group home is 125 Bertrand Street, which is next door to her home at 115 Bertrand Street. Mr. Charles M. Durham, 145 Irma Street, stated that he was from the neighborhood being discussed by the last two (2) speakers and lives a block away from the group home. He advised members that he was the former owner of the property next to Ms. Gardner, which he sold it to the Department of Housing and Urban Development, who indicated that it would be a home for people who needed

SAFETY ADVISORY AND TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 8 short-term assistance. He stated that he went to the neighbors about who would be buying the house and told them what the purpose was, feeling that this was his obligation. That house was torn down and the new one was built. He expressed his apologies to Ms. Gardner, Mr. Richardson, and the other neighbors, stating that had he known the type of facility that was going to be placed there, he would not have sold the property to the buyer. Mr. Durham stated that there were additional issues. Approximately two (2) weeks ago, a 9mm bullet came into his home through a porch window, ricocheted off of the side wall, and landed in a door jamb in a rear room of his home and, based on the angle of entry, the bullet was believed to have come from Simon Circle. In addition, Mr. Durham cited problems with speeding, stating that people disregard the stop signs on Paul and Irma Streets. Mr. Durham stated that he and his wife put up a brand new fence around their yard the first of July, only to have it kicked down by individuals coming through the alley way. He advised members that people speed up and down that alley way and also down Irma and Paul Streets on dirt bikes. Mr. Durham advised that Mr. Richardson had been good enough to talk to the neighborhood about things to solve the problem and he and Mr. Richardson discussed finding a way to block off the entrance to Simon Circle from Reese Street, leaving just a walkway for kids going to school. Mr. Durham recalled that years ago a neighbor by the name of Ms. Martha Woodfolk went around the neighborhood trying to get people to sign a petition to stop the building of Simon Circle and stated that he refused to sign it because he felt that poor people needed a place to live; however, he now wished he had signed the petition. He stated that he and his wife were too old to move, but there were shots fired through his house, another neighbor had two (2) bullet holes in his car and one (1) in the house, and Mr. Richardson had a bullet hole through his basement window. He noted that this was an expense as well. He did not know what could be done in regard to Simon Circle but emphasized that the concerns needed to be addressed. In response to Mr. Sudler regarding the location of the alley that he was referring to regarding the dirt bikes and speeding, Mr. Durham stated that he lives on the corner of Irma Street and Paul Street and the alley runs down the south side of his property and extends from Simon Circle to Davis Circle. Mr. Hutchison stated that there are several group homes within the City and often no one is even aware of their existence, stating that in his experience as a former Mayor of the City of Dover and former City of Dover Police Chief, there are always going to be isolated incidents. He assured those present that the City could reach out to State leadership to address them. Mr. Hutchison stated that the issues and concerns shared tonight were unacceptable and felt that the City of Dover needed to take a leadership role. Mrs. Ann Marie Townshend, Director of Planning and Community Development, stated for the record and to make sure that members of Council and the Committee know that there are State and Federal laws that prohibit treating a group home for people with disabilities any differently than a single-family home, and there can be no differentiation by disability. Mrs. Townshend concurred with Mr. Hutchison that if issues arise, State licensing agencies can be contacted to address the issues. She advised members that Connections Community Support Programs, Inc. owns the home

SAFETY ADVISORY AND TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 9 that had been discussed this evening and stated that Title 22, Chapter 3 of Delaware Code, which gives the City zoning authority, specifically states that group homes for people with disabilities cannot be treated any differently than a single-family home. In response to Mr. Hosfelt, Mrs. Townshend stated that the City does not have licensing that is separate from the state licensing and offered to contact the City Solicitor to determine if a City license could be established, even if it were a non-charged license. This would enable the City to have the homes registered and be aware of their locations in order to follow up if an issue arises, but she cautioned that this is a gray area in terms of fair housing. Responding to Mr. Hosfelt, Mrs. Townshend stated that representatives from Connections were present. In response to Mr. Sudler regarding how Ordinance 2013-04, adopted on April 8, 2013, would apply to the current situation with the Connections home, Mrs. Townshend advised that, based on the calls that the Police Department had received for this location, there was nothing to act on under that ordinance. Mrs. Townshend also stated, in response to Mr. Sudler, that if someone from the agency had exhibited nuisance behavior more than three (3) times within a 12-month period, the City would have to seek the guidance of legal counsel and reiterated that, to date, there had not been any incidences that would permit action under that ordinance. State Rep. Sean Lynn, 224 Columbia Avenue, advised members that this issue had been brought to his attention, stating that he had received numerous emails, originally starting from the Gardner family and then moving out through the Lincoln Park area from those concerned about the neighborhood. Mr. Lynn suggested that the neighborhood be looked at from a public works and public safety perspective, stating the easternmost part of the neighborhood, specifically Cherry and Vine Streets, were in utter disrepair. He expressed his opinion that the streets were in deplorable condition and only suitable for traffic going in one direction (1), definitely not both. Mr. Lynn questioned how Cherry Street and Vine Street were approved, noting that they are not conventional City streets. Mr. Lynn shared his feeling that the neighborhood was in dire need of public works attention, noting that the easternmost part of Slaughter Street was also in disrepair, as well as the stream that borders Lincoln Park on the eastern side, and a culvert off Forrest Avenue is full of debris and waste. Mr. Lynn expressed his uncertainty as to who is responsible for maintaining the stream, but indicated that it was not being maintained at all, and the culvert that runs underneath Forrest Avenue was blocked and needed attention. Mr. Lynn noted that Mr. Hosfelt had raised the issue of creating a homeowners association and a neighborhood watch and said he had tried to reach out to Mr. Richardson in this regard but had been unable to obtain his phone number. Mr. Lynn expressed his hope that Council could encourage the Dover Police Department to reach out to set up a neighborhood watch in Lincoln Park, expressing his belief that it would help drastically, as would increased police presence.

SAFETY ADVISORY AND TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 10 Ms. Kathy McCann, Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of Connections Community Support Programs, Inc., apologized to Mrs. Gardner for what happened to her car, stating that measures should have been in place to ensure this did not occur, and they were now attempting to remedy this. Ms. McCann stated that the reason the original home on the property was torn down was because it had a great deal of asbestos in it and could not be salvaged. She advised members that Connections built a very nice new house and stated that they are dependent on the State Division of Developmental Disabilities and the State Department of Health and Social Services to make referrals for people to live there. Ms. McCann stated that Connections is not funded with $1,500 a day, as someone asserted earlier, and that the people who live have developmental or intellectual disabilities. She explained that the people that live there right now are very young, and they are not very well socialized, and she agreed that they may not be the best people to live in a neighborhood that is so densely populated. Ms. McCann stated that she would go back and tell the State that the current location is not a good placement for those individuals. Ms. McCann noted that the people who live in the Connections’ home were not involved in any shootings and are not speeding in cars or driving motorbikes, stating that those are issues in the neighborhood, but not related to Connections. In response to Mr. Hosfelt regarding her responsibility to ensure that individuals living at the Connections facility are respectable, Ms. McCann stated that she believes it is Connections’ responsibility that staff manage the people who are living there to the best of their ability. She indicated that if the people are not manageable in this setting, Connections can reach out to the State and ask them to do something different with those people. Ms. McCann stated that it is not possible to force an individual to do anything but, in the spirit of neighborliness, everyone has to be willing to work together because there have been a few incidents in which there had been people agitating on both sides. Responding to Mr. Sudler, Ms. McCann stated that the staff members receive a lot of training, but they are mostly people who have high school diplomas, noting that the people who manage the program are people with Master’s degrees and professional training. Ms. McCann pointed out that, unfortunately, the funding that is available for the program is pretty much based on a rate of $10 an hour, which includes benefits. Ms. McCann stated that Connections pays people a little bit more than that in attempt to get people with a little more qualification, but reiterated that they do go through a State-prescribed training program. In response to Mr. Hutchison, Ms. McCann stated that Connections does not put the individuals through a screening process, they are assigned to them by the State agency. Responding to Mr. Hutchison’s comment that this was a problem, Ms. McCann agreed, explaining that Connections does not have the right to say yes or no to a prospective resident; their only recourse is to explain to the State that it is not a good location because of the dense population, which is a problem for those who have issues getting along with other people, noting Connections’ responsibility to be good neighbors.

SAFETY ADVISORY AND TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 11 In response to Mr. Hutchison regarding the State’s responsibility to consider an individual’s ability to be in a neighborhood setting when assigning them to the home, Ms. McCann stated that the problem is that many of these people would otherwise be institutionalized and federal law no longer permits that, so the State is now in the position of having to find alternative places for them to live, adding that funding is also an issue. For the record, Mr. Anderson advised members that Mr. Sudler had previously suggested setting up a mobile substation that could be moved to different areas and locations. Mr. Anderson stated such a substation could stay at a location for two (2) or three (3) months, then move to another location. Mr. Anderson asked that the Committee put this up for investigation and research. Mr. Hutchison stated his belief that Deputy Chief Mailey had heard the complaints and would take them back to Chief Paul Bernat, and together they would come up with a game plan to address some of the concerns regarding Simon Circle and Lincoln Park. Mr. Hutchison expressed his desire to revisit this issue. Mr. Sudler moved to recommend that the Dover Police Department increase their presence in the Simon Circle and Lincoln Park areas, as they had in the other location near State Street, and concentrate on the alley way and the areas of concern. The motion was seconded by Mr. Hutchison and unanimously carried. Deputy Chief Mailey stated that he wanted to advise Council, the residents from Lincoln Park, and all those present that the Police Department’s Street Crimes Unit, which is overseen by Lt. Jason Pires, had been in place in Simon Circle, Lincoln Park, Bertrand Avenue, and that whole area since June 17, 2015, and they had made numerous arrests. Deputy Chief Mailey urged the residents of that area to report immediately any criminal activity that they see or become aware of. Mr. Hutchison moved to defer the remaining agenda items until the July 27, 2015 Safety, Advisory, and Transportation meeting, seconded by Mr. Sudler and unanimously carried. Meeting adjourned at 5:11p.m. James E. Hosfelt, Jr. Chairman JEH/MFK/js/dd S:\AGENDAS-MINUTES-PACKETS-PRESENTATIONS-ATT&EXH\Committee-Minutes\2015\06-22-2015 SA&T.wpd

UTILITY COMMITTEE The Utility Committee Meeting was held on June 22, 2015 at 5:20 p.m. with Chairman Hutchison presiding. Members present were Mr. Cole, Mr. Neil, and Mr. Blakeman. Ms. Stewart was absent. Members of Council present were Mr. Anderson (arrived at 5:29 p.m.), Mr. Sudler (departed at 5:21 p.m.), Mr. Hosfelt (departed at 5:22 p.m., returned at 5:33 p.m., departed at 5:35 p.m.), Mr. Hare (arrived at 5:32 p.m., departed at 5:40 p.m., returned at 5:56 p.m.), and Mr. Slavin (departed at 5:32 p.m.). Mayor Christiansen was also present (arrived at 5:34 p.m.). AGENDA ADDITIONS/DELETIONS Mr. Neil moved for approval of the agenda, seconded by Mr. Blakeman and unanimously carried. HOUSE BILL NO. 171 AMENDING TITLES 9 AND 22 OF THE DELAWARE CODE RELATING TO TAXES ON SPECIAL BETTERMENTS Members were advised that House Bill No. 171 establishes a Telecommunications Tax Modernization Review Group to study and make recommendations for establishing a future funding mechanism to replace the property tax on telecommunications equipment and addressing the projected decrease in revenue to the counties, municipalities and school districts from the transition to new technologies throughout the State. The resulting mechanism should be revenue-neutral to the localities and competitively neutral to providers of like services. To encourage investment in broadband infrastructure, this bill also caps the amount of tax on telecommunications equipment at FY15 rates and eliminates the tax as of June 30, 2018. Mrs. Donna Mitchell, Controller/Treasurer, advised members that a proposed revision for House Bill House Bill 171 (Attachment #1). Mrs. Mitchell stated that the revised bill eliminates the provisions of the original bill establishing the Tax Modernization Review Group and eliminates the repeal of the tax as of June 30, 2018. To encourage investment in broadband infrastructure, it retains the cap on the amount of tax on telecommunications equipment at 2015 levels, and clarifies that the cap only applies with respect to communication providers that are currently subject to the tax and specifies that the limitations on county and municipal taxation will apply as well to school districts and Business Improvement Districts. At the present time this tax is paid only by landline telecommunication providers and not cable companies. Mrs. Mitchell explained that she served with former Representative Darryl Scott on a related committee several years ago and that those in the telecommunication industry felt that they were being taxed unfairly on the betterments tax versus other providers. The committee was to look at different alternatives, but when Rep. Scott did not run again, this did not occur. The proposed amendments aimed for consistency among all providers of telecommunications equipment. Mrs. Mitchell stated her understanding that the current proposal was to work with each community to try to obtain consistency. In response to Councilman Hutchison, Mrs. Mitchell confirmed that the General Assembly would be voting on the amendment on June 23, 2015. She indicated that she agreed with the proposed amendment but not the bill as originally written, and this is what she relayed to the parties that were involved in this.

UTILITY COMMITTEE MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 2 Responding to Mr. Neil, Mrs. Mitchell stated that she did not believe the bill would pass during the current session, stating that there did not seem to be enough support for it. OVERVIEW OF CITY UTILITIES At the request of Chairman Hutchison and for the benefit of new members of Council, Mr. Scott Koenig, City Manager, provided a brief overview of the various utilities that the City of Dover provides to its residents and customers. Mr. Koenig stated that the City’s power system had its 100th anniversary within the last few years and the water system dated back to roughly 1882; therefore, the City had been in the public utility business for many years, which had been a benefit to the City and its customers. [City Clerk’s Office Note: Subsequently during the meeting, Mr. Blakeman advised members that the City’s electric utility came online and began generating power on January 1, 1900, and received a 100-year award from the American Power Association in 2000; therefore, the utility had been generating power for the City of Dover for 115 years.] Mr. Koenig explained that the City of Dover was granted a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity by the State of Delaware to provide electric services in a service territory. The City of Dover proper consists of approximately 24 square miles, and the City’s electric territory is approximately 74 square miles, which extends to Little Creek, Port Mahon, down into Kitt’s Hummock, which includes the Dover Air Force Base and areas south of Route 10, and then comes up and intertwines with the City limits. On the north side, the territory is in line with City limits. Mr. Koenig informed members that when property is annexed into the City, there is usually a letter of agreement where the franchise providing service prior to the annexation is transferred to the City’s electric system. He noted that no financial transaction takes. Mr. Koenig advised members that the City of Dover built a power plant in the 1960s at McKee Run which included two (2) 17 MW units called Unit 1 and Unit 2. In the early 1970s, Unit 3 was added, which is roughly 103 MW, and in approximately 1990, the VanSant combustion turbine was added. Mr. Koenig stated that at that point the City was producing power for the demands of its service territory; however, over the last two and a half decades the City had gravitated toward being part of a regional power supply grid called the PJM system. The City is no longer a primary producer of power but produces power when called upon by the grid. He indicated that the City’s generation capacity is approximately 170 MW. Mr. Koenig explained that Council voted to retire Units 1 and 2, consisting of 34 MW of power, in Power Year 2018 for budgetary reasons. Council had considered replacing those units with either a purchase power agreement or new units that would offer Dover power generation well into the future. Related discussions had been ongoing for approximately four (4) years, and Mr. Koenig stated that it was hoped that staff would be bringing agreements regarding power supply forward to Council for consideration. Mr. Koenig stated that the Calpine Corporation had come before Council to obtain authorization for a 618 MW facility for two (2) units, the first of which was for the Garrison Energy Center, which became commercially available on June 1, 2015, began producing power to the grid, and became the City’s largest water customer overnight. Prior to the unit coming onto the grid, the thought was that once it did, Dover would not be called upon to generate power; however, that had not been the case.

UTILITY COMMITTEE MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 3 Mr. Koenig reiterated that power generation is a very fluid and complicated environment, making it difficult to determine when Dover will be called upon to produce power. He stated that there are many producers inside the grid, but some are being retired and coming offline because they are old coal technology. Mr. Koenig stated that the call for who runs and who does not changes on a daily basis. When nuclear power plants are offline for maintenance, many more facilities are called up than when these plants are online and available. Mr. Koenig advised members that there had been some difficulty with gas supply in the last couple of weeks, and he hoped to find out more about that issue in meetings with The Energy Authority and Eastern Shore Natural Gas. He referenced to inconsistences with gas transmission and expressed his belief that this was due to the heavy demand of the new Calpine facility. Mr. Koenig indicated that the Electric Fund is tagged at roughly $89M of revenue in this year’s budget, and this money is used to cover the cost to purchase power from the system as well as the capital plan, which includes vehicle purchases, equipment purchases, line replacements, substation upgrades and/or replacements, and replacement of both large and small transformers. This revenue also supports needs related to facilities and infrastructure and a transfer from the Electric Fund to the General Fund. In the FY 16 budget, approximately $10.85M will transfer from public utilities directly into the General Fund, $10M from the Electric Fund and $850,000 from the Water/Wastewater Fund. Regarding the electric utility, Mr. Koenig stated that the City serves approximately 23,000 customers, ranging from single-family houses all the way up to the Dover Air Force Base. A cost of service study was performed to properly allocate costs and identify what the rates should be for each class of customer. Mr. Koenig noted that the City of Dover residential electric rates are the lowest in the State of Delaware but the commercial rates are not the lowest. Mr. Koenig stated that the water and sewer system service territory is not quite as big as the electric service system. He noted that the City serves areas outside its corporate limits and has interconnection agreements with Tidewater Utilities, who purchases water from the City in the northwest portion of the City and supplies subdivisions northwest of the City. In addition, Tidewater purchases water from Dover through the Lakeland interconnection for the Lakeland Mobile Home Park and businesses on South State Street. Mr. Koenig stated that the City’s relationship with Tidewater over the last decade had been very good, noting that Tidewater has four (4) of Dover’s top 20 meters. Mr. Koenig explained that the water and sewer systems are accounted for separately to ensure that the cost of water is covered by the water charge and the cost of sewer by the sewer charge; however, these funds are intermingled in a water and sewer enterprise fund. Total revenues expected in FY16 were $19.3M, including new revenue projected from the Calpine facility. Mr. Koenig advised that originally, the water system revenue was estimated to be about $1.6M and the sewer system in the $300,000 range. He indicated that the water system consists of approximately 14,000 to 15,000 meters, requiring a lot of manpower for care and maintenance. Water quality complaints were expected when Calpine came online but not many complaints were received. It was hoped that water quality would improve since water would be moving quickly through the system on that part of the City due to Calpine’s demand.

UTILITY COMMITTEE MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 4 Mr. Koenig stated that improvements were proposed over the long term for the water system, including potentially developing another aquifer, noting that if this will be necessary if Calpine builds a second generating unit. He indicated that the City has a 1.5M gallon water tower under construction presently at the Garrison Oak Technology Park, which is the City’s largest tower by about 50 percent and another 1M gallon tower was scheduled to be built in the north middle quadrant of the City pending final resolution on a site. This would offset fire demands and provide additional elevated storage for supply. Additional improvements will be made to the system through pipe replacements. Mr. Koenig advised members that staff expected to return to Council to review rates, explaining that efficiency had affected the City’s water utilities. Plumbing codes had changed, and low-flow fixtures and low-flush toilets had significantly reduced household water usage. In the 1980s, a generic house used 300 gallons of water per day, and now a generic house uses 250 gallons per day, a drop of 50 gallons per day, which was a significant change when multiplied by 8,000 to 10,000 households. Mr. Koenig stated other changes also affect the water/wastewater utility. In the early 1990s, Proctor & Gamble expanded their paper-making process, which put a significant demand on the water system of approximately 600,000 gallons a day. However, in the last 10 years, they had stopped making that product at that location and water demand decreased by 600,000 gallons per day. He indicated that it is difficult to make up for these types of fluctuations in production and revenue. On the electric side, Mr. Koenig informed members that a push for more efficient air conditioning systems was affecting the electric utility. It was expected that electric load, even with growth, may be relatively flat over the next few years due to the implementation of systems using less power. He indicated that these are the types of variables used to set rates, determine how to recover fixed costs, develop revenue projections for future budgets, and review revenues for current budgets. In regard to the sewer utility, Mr. Koenig stated that in the early 1970s, the City built a sewage treatment plant at the old PW2 warehouse location at the end of Water Street, which came online in about 1971. The plant was in operation for only a couple of years when the City transferred all of its waste to Kent County. Mr. Koenig expressed his opinion that the City was very fortunate to be with the County system because it is not necessary to do any of the related permitting or worry about the actual treatment of waste water coming out of of Dover. All flow from the City of Dover is sent to the County by contract and they have an obligation, under their Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) permit and Division of Natural Resources and Environmental Control (DNREC) permits, to treat the City’s waste and deliver it to the Murderkill River in a state that is equal to or better than drinking water quality. Mr. Koenig indicated that the City was benefitting today from not having to run its wastewater treatment plant. In terms of infrastructure, Mr. Koenig stated Dover has approximately 40 pump stations, which vary from small stations serving eight (8) to 10 houses, to large pump stations like the Puncheon Run station that serves industrial flow coming out of Kraft and Procter & Gamble. Mr. Koenig pointed out that it is critical that those stations work, noting that Dover had gone through replacement and renewals on the wastewater side, and backup generation was being constructed at those facilities

UTILITY COMMITTEE MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 5 because the potential for overflows into streams and rivers or onto the ground would be significant if the power goes out. Mr. Koenig stated he is grateful that Dover has such a reliable system with very few system-wide outages, noting the impact a power outage can have, such as sewage backing up in people’s homes. Mr. Koenig pointed out that owning its own utilities places the City in a good position to attract businesses; however, it require a lot of hours and manpower to run those enterprises. Because of the enterprise funds, the City recovers at least the cost associated with running them, and the intent of Dover’s public utilities is to return money to the General Fund as internal profit for going through the pain of having to run the utilities, noting that they are 24/7 operations that require a lot of manpower, capital, and time from the Mayor, Council, and staff to keep systems functioning. He expressed his opinion that the City is in much better shape through owning the utilities as it can better control its own destiny. In response to Mr. Neil regarding the cost to buy power if the City were not a generator, Mr. Koenig explained that the City’s power plant and combustion turbine act as a physical hedge for the City, which provides leverage in buying power. It was his belief that Mr. Harry Maloney, Electric Director, may have estimated this cost at roughly $2M. With no ability to generate, the City would be completely at the risk of the market sale price. Because the City has its own generation, the market stops at the City’s cost to produce into the market. Even though this cost can be relatively high in some cases, it is much less than if the City were at risk in the market. He noted that during really cold days this past winter, the per megawatt hour cost exceeded $1,000, $1,500, or $1,800 per hour; therefore, having generation gave an actual physical hedge that provided leverage in buying in the market. Responding to Mr. Neil regarding whether a deal had been attained with Calpine, Mr. Koenig advised that the City did not have a deal worked out with Calpine on paper at this time. He stated that some regulation issues are being discussed with the EPA that have a significant impact on the products and prices that would be offered in the marketplace. Although the framework was in place, no one was willing to strike a price until those issues are resolved. Mr. Koenig stated that once they are resolved, staff would come before Council with a proposed agreement. Responding to Mr. Anderson regarding the City’s industrial rates, Mr. Koenig advised that commercial and industrial rates are grouped together and the City’s rates rank in the middle to upper end. TEA/NAES REPORTS (MARCH AND APRIL) The TEA/NAES Monthly Reports for March and April 2015 were provided to members to enable them to monitor electric sales and revenues received, which will provide a better understanding of any fluctuations that occur and allow the opportunity to make improvements if deemed necessary. Mr. Blakeman expressed his preference for having actual PJM invoices included in the TEA/NAES reports versus the format used in the April report. In response to Mr. Blakeman, Mr. Koenig stated that would contact TEA/NAES to make this request.

UTILITY COMMITTEE MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 6 DISCUSSION ITEM PROPOSED DURING THE FY 2015/16 BUDGET REVIEW Cost-Benefit Analysis of Power Plant Operation Mr. Scott Koenig. City Manager, stated that a motion was made during the FY 2015/16 budget review that the City consider performing a cost/benefit analysis of its power plant operation. Mr. Koenig stated that in the five (5) year forecast, the power plant was slightly negative in cash during one (1) year but positive in all other years. Mr. Koenig noted that a one (1) year cost/benefit analysis would not be beneficial since a decision could not be made based on a return of one (1) year and stated the need to define the timeline of the analysis. He stated that, without question, owning the physical plant and having the ability to contract its operation and oversee its contracts would be the right thing to do for the benefit of customers. Mr. Koenig felt that reviewing it on an annualized basis would provide only a snapshot, whereas a profile over years showed it had been a benefit to the City and would continue to be in the foreseeable future. Responding to Mr. Blakeman regarding the life expectancy of Unit 3, Mr. Koenig stated that Mr. Harry Maloney, Electric Director, estimated there would be approximately 10 years before there were concerns regarding its life expectancy. When discussing the life expectancy of Units 1 and 2, North American Energy Services (NAES) engineers had indicated that the units could last as long as desired, depending on what the City wanted to put into them. Mr. Koenig indicated that the projected life expectancy of the turbine was roughly 50 years. He advised members that the City was doing everything it could to get it to 50 years, and when closing in on this time frame, would make decisions on whether to maintain or replace that unit. Mr. Koenig stated that replacement would cost roughly $1M per MW; therefore, replacing it would be more than a $120M expense. Mr. Blakeman questioned if decreased prices due to the impact of older coal-fired generation units being replaced with gas turbines had been a concern when considering the life expectancy of this unit. He felt that it may be priced out of the market and not be called to run. Responding, Mr. Koenig stated that this was a concern; however, The Energy Authority (TEA) does a good job of looking at those numbers on an annualized basis. He reiterated that in spite of initial concerns that Dover would not be called upon once Calpine was on board, that had not been the case, but could potentially be in the future. Mr. Blakeman stated his opinion that Calpine may be asking to put in a second unit a year from now. Mr. Koenig concurred that this was a possibility. Responding to Mr. Hutchison regarding the projected cost associated with keeping Units 1 and 2 running, Mr. Koenig stated that the consensus was that it would be more cost effective to the City to build new generation versus maintaining the current units or to execute a purchase power agreement. Mr. Neil moved to defer Item #5, Updates, to the July 13, 2015 Utility Committee Meeting. The motion was seconded by Mr. Blakeman and unanimously carried.

UTILITY COMMITTEE MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 7 By unanimous consent, the meeting adjourned at 5:58 p.m. James Hutchison, Sr. Chairman JLH/TM/mfk/js S:\AGENDAS-MINUTES-PACKETS-PRESENTATIONS-ATT&EXH\Committee-Minutes\2015\06-22-2015 UTILITY.wpd Attachments Attachment #1 - House Substitute No. 2 for House Bill No. 171

ATTACHMENT #1 Utility Committee Meeting 06/22/2015 SPONSOR: Rep. Bennett & Sen. Hall-Long & Sen. McDowell Reps. Hudson, Q. Johnson, Keeley, Longhurst, Schwartzkopf, M. Smith, Viola; Sens. Blevins, Lavelle, Poore, Simpson HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 148th GENERAL ASSEMBLY HOUSE SUBSTITUTE NO. 2 FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 171 AN ACT AMENDING TITLES 9 AND 22 OF THE DELAWARE CODE RELATING TO TAXES ON SPECIAL BETTERMENTS. BE IT ENACTED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE: 1 Section 1. Amend § 8101(e)(8), Title 9 of the Delaware Code, by making deletions as shown by strike through 2 and insertions as shown by underline as follows: 3 § 8101. Property subject to county taxation. 4 (e) Special betterments, whether or not also considered to be improvements, shall include and be limited to the 5 following: 6 (8) Poles, wires, cable and conduit for distribution of telephone communication services either above or 7 below ground; provided, however, that in no event shall the amount of tax imposed on communications providers 8 that were paying tax on such property as of June 30, 2015, exceed the amount actually paid by such provider to each 9 political subdivision in the fiscal year ending June 30, 2015; 10 Section 2. Amend §2001, Title 22 of the Delaware Code, by making deletions as shown by strike through and 11 insertions as shown by underline as follows: 12 § 2001 Limitation of municipal taxing powers. 13 (a) Every municipal corporation in this State, regardless of population, shall only have the power to impose, levy, 14 assess, or collect a tax of any kind whatsoever as expressly authorized in its municipal charter or this title. 15 (b) Any provision in a municipal charter granting the municipal corporation "all powers," or any derivation 16 thereof, shall not be construed as exempting the municipal corporation from the limitation set forth in subsection (a) of this 17 section. Page 1 of 2 HD : KL : TEH Released: 06/17/2015 12:42 PM 1031480198

18 (c) The amount of tax imposed on a communication provider who was being taxed as of June 30, 2015, by 19 municipal corporations on poles, wires, conduit and cable for distribution of telephone communication may not exceed the 20 amount of tax actually paid by such provider to each municipal corporation in fiscal year ending June 30, 2015. 21 Section 3. The restrictions imposed on the counties’ and municipalities’ taxation of poles, wires, cables and 22 conduit for distribution of telephone communication services in Sections 1 and 2 above shall also apply to school districts 23 and Business Improvement Districts. SYNOPSIS This substitute bill eliminates the provisions of the original bill establishing the Tax Modernization Review Group and eliminates the repeal of the tax as of June 30, 2018. To encourage investment in broadband infrastructure, it retains the cap on the amount of tax on telecommunications equipment at 2015 levels, and clarifies that the cap only applies with respect to communication providers that are currently subject to the tax and specifies that the limitations on county and municipal taxation will apply as well to school districts and Business Improvement Districts. At the present time this tax is paid only by landline telecommunication providers and not cable companies. Page 2 of 2 HD : KL : TEH Released: 06/17/2015 12:42 PM 1031480198

LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE The Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee meeting was held on June 22, 2015, at 6:01 p.m. with Chairman Hare presiding. Members present were Mr. Cole, Mr. Sudler, Ms. Maucher, and Mr. Shevock. Members of Council present were Mr. Anderson, Mr. Neil (arrived at 7:01 p.m.), Mr. Lewis (arrived at 6:56 p.m.), Mr. Hosfelt, Mr. Hutchison, and Mr. Slavin (departed at 6:45 p.m. and returned at 6:49 p.m.). Mayor Christiansen was also present. AGENDA ADDITIONS/DELETIONS Mr. Cole moved for approval of the agenda, seconded by Mr. Shevock and unanimously carried. Disposition of City Owned Land – Property Located at 423 Collins Drive, 749 West North Street, and 29 South Governors Avenue Mr. Scott Koenig, City Manager, informed members that the City of Dover acquired properties located at 423 Collins Drive, 749 West North Street, and 29 South Governors Avenue at a monition sale due to liens for taxes and demolition expenses. He stated that these are excess properties, as the City has no use for them and would be better served by the properties being redeveloped and restored as taxable properties. Mr. Koenig advised that the City has a procedure for Sale and Disposition of Real Property, which includes a “Standard Method of Disposition” that begins at the Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee. As articulated in the procedure, the first decision by Council (after a favorable recommendation by the Committee) is whether or not to dispose of the surplus property and, subsequently, to determine the method of disposal (auction or sealed bid). Mr. Koenig reviewed the City’s expenses and other charges, as well as the City’s 2015 Assessed Land Value for each property, as follows: City’s 2015 City Expenses and Assessed Land Address Other Charges Value 423 Collins Drive $ 20,481.13 $ 39,200.00 29 S. Governors Avenue $ 23,828.90 $ 13,600.00 749 W. North Street $ 19,889.45 $ 52,300.00 Mr. Koenig noted that the City’s expenses and other charges are inclusive of property tax, sheriff sale preparation fees, grass charges, utility charges, and demolition charges. He explained that for two (2) of the three (3) properties, the City’s expenses are less than the land value, and staff was of the opinion that these properties should be put back on the market through sealed bid versus being gifted. The City could potentially recover additional costs and reduce the amount of the potential write-off by seeking bids on the vacant property. Additionally, these properties were not located in the areas where local housing non-profit organizations were focusing their efforts to acquire and develop properties.

LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 2 Staff recommended the following action: 1) determine that the properties are excess property; and 2) authorize the City Manager to dispose of the properties using the “Standard Method of Disposition.” Mr. Koenig stated that the “Standard Method of Disposition” for these properties would be through sealed bid, explaining that staff had put together a very generic bid package, including property information and zoning information. He informed members that those packages go to the City’s purchasing agent and are posted on the City’s website, and the City would receive bids on a specified date. Mr. Koenig explained that staff had talked to several developers, in the context of the downtown development district, that had expressed interest in these properties. He stated that since staff believed that, at a minimum, there would be several people interested in bidding on these properties, the recommendation was to dispose of them through sealed bid. Mr. Shevock moved to recommend that the properties located at 423 Collins Drive, 749 West North Street, and 29 South Governors Avenue be designated to be sold and determined to be excess property, and that the City Manager be authorized to dispose of the subject properties using the “Standard Method of Disposition.” The motion was seconded by Mr. Cole and unanimously carried. Discussion Items Proposed During Budget Review Due Diligence Research on Health Insurance Costs Mr. Anderson stated that he was definitely a supporter of maintaining the quality of the City healthcare plan and ensuring that there is no diminution of that quality. He expressed his opinion that the City employees and taxpayers would welcome looking at opportunities to see if they can have the same quality of coverage and pay less money, particularly since there is cost sharing. Mr. Anderson advised that Kent County pays less money than the City does for similar coverage. He suggested that the City at least look at and study the process to determine whether or not the City and the taxpayers can save money, since this is one (1) of the largest line items in the City’s budget. He noted that it would be irresponsible for the City not to do so. In reference to Mr. Anderson’s statement that Kent County pays less than the City for the same healthcare coverage, Mr. Sudler questioned what agency Kent County uses. Responding, Mr. Anderson stated that Kent County uses L & W Insurance. In response to Mr. Hare, Mr. Anderson stated that Kent County has the same Highmark Blue Cross Blue Shield insurance coverage as the City. Mr. Sudler questioned whether the City had received any bid proposals from L & W Insurance and inquired as to the City Manager’s thoughts on this company. Responding, Mr. Scott Koenig, City Manager, recalled that in 2011 the City did either a request for proposals or a request for cost, and L & W Insurance did submit information; however, the recommendation was to stay with the State of Delaware. He advised that the playing field changes yearly, so it would be something that the City would have to pursue for FY 2017. Mr. Koenig reminded members that currently all of the City’s

LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 3 collective bargaining agreements reference the State of Delaware plan. He explained that for the City to change plans, the contracts would have to be altered going forward, noting that two (2) of the contracts are up for negotiation now. Mr. Shevock questioned whether the City had ever considered putting a cap on what the City pays to cover an employee’s healthcare coverage. In response, Mr. Koenig indicated that prior to 2011, the City had a committee with multiple stakeholders in the City that discussed ways to control costs. However, he explained that one (1) of the difficulties was that none of the unions would recommend ways to control costs because they thought that was part of the collective bargaining process for those particular groups. Mr. Koenig advised that, essentially, the City has six (6) different groups in the healthcare plan, including the four (4) unions; non-bargaining employees, which includes approximately 40 employees; and all of the retirees that are on the plan, who are not represented directly by anyone. He stated that a cap would have to be negotiated for any of the union contracts, and it would be a challenging task to implement a cap, dealing with six (6) different groups Responding to Mr. Hare, Mr. Koenig explained that the language in at least two (2) of the union contracts is very specific in reference to the State of Delaware plans. He advised that if the City were to change its insurance plan, even if the same coverage was provided at a lower cost, it would have to be accomplished through the collective bargaining process, noting that there is a price to pay for that, just like everything else in the contract. Mayor Christiansen questioned how much the City’s healthcare cost with the State of Delaware had increased. In response, Mr. Koenig advised that it was a little more than 16%. Mayor Christiansen indicated that the increase in the City’s healthcare cost was one (1) of the reasons for the increase in the City’s tax rate and budget, and questioned whether Kent County had fewer employees than the City. Responding, Mr. Hare stated that Kent County had 350 people on their health plan, including employees and retirees. Mayor Christiansen offered to lead a committee consisting of himself, a human resource person, the Assistant City Manager, and the City Treasurer to compare what is available in healthcare benefits with L&W Insurance and perhaps others, put out a request for proposals (RFP), and make sure that the City is getting the biggest bang for its dollar. Mayor Christiansen noted that it was his understanding that with the continued State contracts, there is a possibility that next year the City’s cost could go up 20 to 25%. He stated that this committee would report back to Council within 45 to 60 days. Mr. Hare stated that he would like to include other people on the committee as well, and expressed his opinion that, with her current workload, Mrs. Donna Mitchell, Controller/Treasurer, may not need to be involved with this committee at this time. Responding, Mayor Christiansen suggested having the Assistant Treasurer serve on the committee, or someone who has the numbers.

LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 4 Mr. Koenig stated that this would not be a 45 to 60 day undertaking, noting that it would probably take four (4) to six (6) months, at a minimum. He explained that the quotes would be for July of 2016 and an insurance provider may say that they can save the City money for one (1) year; however, they cannot guarantee anything after that. Mr. Koenig stated that this is currently one (1) of the most unstable areas in the economy to be reviewing. He reminded members that this was a huge issue related to the City workforce and would cause major strife moving forward. In response to Mr. Hare, Mr. Koenig stated that no one could provide a guarantee on costs, even the State of Delaware; however, he expressed his opinion that being part of a larger group is more beneficial for the City of Dover. Mrs. Mitchell clarified that the State is a self-insured plan; however, the insurance that Kent County has is not a self-insured plan. Mrs. Mitchell stated that Aetna and Blue Cross Highmark, and Blue Cross Blue Shield had gone to the insurance commissioner to request a 20% to 25% increase, which would affect the County plan, not the State self-insured plan. Mr. Hare stated that he did not want to change the coverage or reduce it so that the deductible would be higher, etc. His concern was that the City did not know whether or not its insurance rates could have been reduced during the past four (4) to five (5) years. Mr. Hare stated that the rates were worth examining, even if it were to take four (4) to six (6) months, as long as the committee would be led by the Mayor. Mayor Christiansen stated that he would take this responsibility and Council could set up the committee as it wants. He explained that the City had an obligation to the taxpayers and employees for maintenance of standards. Mayor Christiansen felt that the City needs to know whether the current insurance is the best deal available for all concerned, while maintaining the coverage employees had become accustomed to. Mr. Shevock moved to recommend approval of Mayor Christiansen’s proposal to go forward with the health insurance cost research, seconded by Mr. Sudler. Mr. Cole questioned whether or not there would be a timeline or checkpoints associated with this recommendation, noting that, realistically, it would take a long time. In response, Mr. Hare stated that the committee should have some results back by the first of the year. Mayor Christiansen suggested the beginning of the budget process. Mrs. Traci McDowell, City Clerk, questioned whether the Committee wanted to define the number of members and the charge of the recommended committee, so that Council will know exactly what they are voting on when this recommendation is considered. Responding, Mr. Hare suggested that the committee consist of at least two (2) members of Council, the City Manager, Mayor, Human Resources Director, and the Controller/Treasurer or her assistant.

LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 5 Mr. Shevock and Mr. Sudler agreed to the amendment to the motion as recommended by Mr. Hare. The motion to recommend approval of Mayor Christiansen’s proposal to go forward with the health insurance cost research, as amended to include the creation of a committee to consist of at least two (2) members of Council, the City Manager, Mayor, Human Resources Director, and the Controller/Treasurer or her assistant, was unanimously carried. Performance Audit of Civilian Side of City Government Mr. Anderson suggested that members begin to look at city government from the perspective of efficiency and examine the benefits of a performance audit, noting that there are many ways to look at better ways of governing. He informed members that the State of Delaware has some processes with the Baldrige Awards, through which the City could get money to look at efficiency. Mr. Anderson stated that these excellence awards provide different goals, and there are options for various other performance audits. He recommended that the City explore these options since Council was considering tax and utility rate increases, and members need to be able to tell people, with assurance, that the City is using their money in the best way. Mayor Christiansen reminded members that the City had an Ad Hoc Financial and Operational Advisory Committee; however, they seemed to have fallen by the wayside. He suggested that the City take advantage of professional people within the community, including citizens, retired business executives, etc. in order to complete a review of each department with in-house personnel. Mayor Christiansen expressed his opinion that the City should re-energize the Ad Hoc Financial and Operational Advisory Committee with new members to review all departments and report back to Council with their findings. He stated that he would like to serve as the chairperson, noting that he had the time and could do an in-depth review. Mayor Christiansen reiterated that this review should be done in-house, although the committee could include a member or two (2) of Council, if the Committee so wished. He noted that this suggestion was not to be critical of any City staff; however, he felt it important to develop mechanisms to streamline some of the departments in the interest of the taxpayers. Responding to Mr. Hare, Mrs. Traci McDowell, City Clerk, stated that the Ad Hoc Financial and Operational Advisory Committee consisted of seven (7) members. Mrs. Donna Mitchell, Controller/Treasurer, expressed her appreciation of everyone's interest in this topic. She agreed that the City should look at some things to determine whether anything can be done differently or better. Mrs. Mitchell requested that staff be allowed to brainstorm ideas and bring them back to Council, prior to the appointment of an ad hoc committee. She advised that throwing together a committee could result in the same issues that the City experienced with the previously ad hoc committee. In response to Mrs. Mitchell’s comments, Mayor Christiansen stated that this would be a different committee, and expressed his opinion that time was of the essence and the committee could coordinate its efforts before moving forward.

LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 6 Mrs. Mitchell agreed that time was of the essence and requested an opportunity for staff to bring recommendations to the Committee within July or the first week of August. She stated that staff could work with Mayor Christiansen to include his thoughts prior to bringing it back to Council. Mr. Anderson stated that Mrs. Mitchell had been working on some efforts with the City Warehouse and Finance Department, and the library had been conducting its own efforts. He questioned if Mrs. Mitchell had any success in her efforts with the City Warehouse or Finance Department. Responding, Mrs. Mitchell stated that staff had not yet had success in those efforts and that is why she requested an opportunity for staff to meet to discuss the roadblocks they had experienced and potential bottlenecks so that they can try to resolve those issues and get everyone on the same page. This would allow staff to present solutions and/or processes which they believe will work and be accomplished in a timely manner. Mr. Hare suggested that the Committee start by recommending a format for the ad hoc committee. He inquired as to Mayor Christiansen’s opinion regarding having seven (7) people on the committee, noting that two (2) members of Council could agree to appoint one (1) member from each district, the at-large Council member could appoint one (1) member, and the mayor could appoint two (2) members. He suggested that the mayor would also serve as the chairperson. In response to Mr. Hare, Mayor Christiansen expressed his opinion that the committee format should serve the best interest of the citizens and include representation throughout the entire City, and preferably the members would not have predisposed agendas. Council President Slavin advised that the Ad Hoc Financial and Operational Advisory Committee was appointed by the Council President. He stated that he would not be opposed to having an appointment of that type, explaining that the Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee could make a recommendation and the full Council would then take action on it to form the ad hoc committee. Mr. Slavin offered a Plan B, which would allow members of Council to provide him recommendations and he could simply reappoint the Ad Hoc Financial and Operational Advisory Committee. Mr. Hutchison reminded members that there were five (5) new members of Council and suggested that Council have an opportunity to discuss ideas in a workshop with staff in order to develop a master plan to help the City move forward. Mr. Hare agreed that a workshop may be the best first step, noting that it would provide staff an opportunity to meet and bring their ideas forward to Council for discussion. He stated that Council could then decide if this committee is necessary. Mr. Anderson stated that he did not have any objections to staff taking a month, noting the importance and benefits of staff buy-in. Referring to the potential of forming a committee, Mr. Anderson expressed his hope that Council would allow the City Manager’s appointee and the finance director, or her appointee, to be ex-officio members.

LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 7 Mr. Sudler stated that he liked both ideas, noting that the workshop idea would be very beneficial to the new members of Council and that it is also important to have buy-in from the community and involve them in the decision-making process. Mr. Hosfelt requested clarification regarding the independent study which Council previously voted in favor of conducting. Responding, Mr. Hare stated that the independent study was for police and fire, and this study would include everything else. Mr. Cole moved to recommend that staff and Council report back their findings in one (1) month. The motion failed for lack of a second. Mr. Hare suggested that staff have their information ready by August 1, 2015 and that a workshop be scheduled for the first part of August. Mrs. McDowell requested clarification regarding what type of findings the Committee was looking for. In response, Mrs. Mitchell explained that she was referring to strategic plans or strategic ideas that staff believes would improve processes and gain more efficiencies. She noted that these findings would not be all inclusive. Mrs. McDowell questioned if members of Council would be bringing their ideas to a workshop. Responding, Mr. Hare clarified that Council would not do this; rather, Council would meet to review staff’s ideas and proceed from there. Mr. Scott Koenig, City Manager, expressed his opinion that members of Council should bring their ideas to the Council workshop in order to have a two-way dialogue, since staff and Council may have different ideas regarding efficiency improvements. He stated that he did not wish to present only staff’s ideas and requested that members of Council provide staff with any specific ideas that they would like to discuss prior to the workshop, so that staff can bring information to the workshop. In response to Mr. Koenig’s comments, Mayor Christiansen expressed his opinion that the committee needs to move forward. Mr. Sudler requested Mrs. Mitchell to provide five (5) sections or segments of the City that staff may consider first. Responding, Mrs. Mitchell stated that one (1) example of the types of ideas she is considering is a central services fund which would centralize fleet and operations in an effort to inventory all of the fleets and implement cross-divisional fleet sharing. She explained that there would be a central services manager who would schedule the fleet, ensure that the City is not buying more equipment than necessary, and log the current equipment’s usage to determine things like how often it is used and whether the City can rent equipment. Mr. Sudler suggested that Mrs. Mitchell provide members of Council and the Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee with the flowchart that she will develop to direct staff’s focus, in order for everyone to focus on the same areas for discussion at the workshop.

LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 8 Mr. Hare questioned whether Mrs. Mitchell required Council approval to move forward with her idea regarding a central services fund. Responding, Mrs. Mitchell stated that she did not require Council approval and that she had begun discussing her ideas with Mr. Koenig. She advised that she would like to include all department heads in the strategic discussion because many have ideas that they would like to share. Mrs. Mitchell explained that when you have a committee first, employees and the public attend the meetings. She expressed her preference for department heads to be given an opportunity to discuss their ideas and bring them together first. Mayor Christiansen questioned what staff discusses during department head meetings. In response, Mrs. Mitchell stated that staff’s current department head meetings are for the discussion of agendas, and the City Manager also has individual meetings with department heads. In response to Mr. Hare, Mrs. Mitchell explained that she is not the operations person, and allowing for a group discussion of all department heads would enable staff to determine if there are reasons why these types of changes have not been implemented in the past. Ms. Maucher questioned whether a committee format would be more conducive to open discussion between staff and Council. She favored the idea of a committee, stating that this format allows for collaboration and for ideas to be sorted out. Responding to Ms. Maucher, Mrs. Mitchell stated that she would not mind a committee meeting; however, she requested the opportunity for staff to meet independently prior to the committee meeting. Mrs. Mitchell reiterated that she was in favor of a workshop that would allow everyone to be a part of the discussion. Ms. Maucher questioned whether there is a public document that details the functions, workflows, etc. of each department. In response, Mrs. Mitchell explained that this was included in the budget document and indicated that she would provide Ms. Maucher with a copy. Mr. Anderson stated that there was a review being conducted by the Mayor, Assistant City Manager, and others, and suggested inviting them to provide their input as well. Mr. Cole moved to recommend that the staff strategic planning team and members of Council develop ideas by August 1, 2015 and that a workshop be scheduled after August 1st. The motion was seconded by Mr. Sudler. Mr. Hare noted that the Committee’s agenda for this evening also included an item regarding Review of All Lifecycle Items (Report to Committee in 90 Days) and questioned whether this could be part of the performance audit discussion. In response to Mr. Hare, Mr. Koenig advised that these items were motions made during the Special Council - Budget Review meetings and could all be part of the performance audit discussion. He reminded members that the issue of the City’s form of government still needed to be solidified. He indicated that he did not have the ability to impose his goals for the entire organization because it

LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 9 was still unclear who reports to whom, since the motions had been somewhat contradictory. Mr. Koenig stated that staff looks for efficiencies across the organization; however, Mrs. Mitchell’s idea regarding the creation of a centralized fleet was not a simple undertaking because the City does not currently have that type of facility. He advised that it may require construction of a new facility at an existing or new location. Mr. Koenig thought it would be great to do a strategic plan in order to get these ideas out there; however, he noted that these would be long-term goals. Mr. Koenig stated that the items proposed during the budget hearings would require a significant amount of staff time to develop and bring forward for consideration. It was Mr. Koenig’s understanding that the Committee was prioritizing these items in order for staff to bring them forward to Council on a regular basis. He informed members that there was a lot of difficulty with the Ad Hoc Financial and Operational Advisory Committee because the workforce got extremely agitated by some of the discussion. Mr. Koenig reminded everyone that he must keep the organization moving forward and focused on the task while discussing all of these issues. He stated that this needs to have a very position spin, explaining that these are improvements to better the organization and service delivery, noting that everyone wants to provide services to the City at the lowest cost possible. Mr. Koenig stated that the City needs to decide step by step how to move forward. He reiterated his request for a resolution to the form of government issue, so that there is a clear understanding of what items needs to be brought forward to Council. Mr. Hare agreed that the City does need to fix the form of government. Mayor Christiansen concurred with Mr. Koenig; however, he stated that a new committee with responsibilities assigned by the Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee and Council could prove to be very productive on behalf of the citizens. Mrs. Mitchell stated that she did not go into all of the details with the Committee; however, when she discussed the idea of central services with the City Manager, it did include a building project. She expressed her thoughts that the list of proposed items discussed during the Special Council - Budget Review meetings could be prioritized first and then brought back to Council. Mrs. Mitchell agreed that many of these items could be included in the strategic plan discussion in August. The motion to recommend that the staff strategic planning team and members of Council develop ideas by August 1, 2015 and a workshop be scheduled after August 1st was unanimously carried. Proposed New Revenue Sources for FY 2016/17 Mr. Scott Koenig, City Manager, advised that staff would be prepared to bring forward recommendations for new revenue sources in the August/September time frame.

LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 10 Public Safety Fee Study Mr. Hare explained that he had contacted the City Solicitor’s office and has appointments with other people to determine the feasibility of the City moving forward with this study and requested that discussion of this item be deferred. By unanimous consent, the Committee deferred consideration of this matter. Review of All Lifecycle Items (Report to Committee in 90 Days) Mr. Hare reminded members that this matter was previously discussed during consideration of the Performance Audit of Civilian Side of City Government and staff indicated that it would be included as part of that discussion in the future. Review of Internal Applicant Hiring/Training Opportunities Mr. Sudler advised that the purpose of this discussion was to ensure that City employees have the opportunity to apply for other positions within the City and if they are not awarded a position because they do not meet the qualifications, that training is provided to enable them to be awarded the job in the future or be in a better position to compete for the job. Mr. Cole questioned the Committee’s position on this item, noting that in his professional career, this is a collective bargaining issue. Responding, Mr. Sudler stated that this would be for all employees because any employee can apply for an internal position, whether or not they are in a union. Mr. Sudler advised that management previously indicated that the City does provide employees with opportunities for professional enhancement training. Mr. Hare clarified that the City provides employees training for their current positions. He explained that an accountant who was interested in become the finance director could go to school and take accounting classes; however, the City would not send an accountant to school to become a city planner. Mr. Hare also noted that the employee must take the initiative; management does not approach them regarding their desire to move up within the organization. Mr. Scott Koenig, City Manager, explained that this is a two-way street. Referring to some of the City’s labor positions, he stated that there is always follow-up with an employee who is not selected for a position to help prepare him/her for the next job opportunity with the City; however, there are issues, such as the ability to use computers or basic software. Mr. Koenig advised that it is somewhat incumbent on the employee to make management aware of their desire to move up, to find out exactly why they were not selected for a position, and to ask about future training opportunities. He explained that the City does not pre-select employees to go to training or move up; an employee must identify themself as someone who wants to move up and meet the qualifications. Mr. Koenig reminded members that training and travel had been cut from the City budget for several years; however, that approach impaired the City and the employees from being in a position to understand current trends and technology, as well as being prepared for the next round of supervisory

LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 11 positions and promotions. He stated that funding for training had been added back into each division budget over the past four (4) fiscal years to allow for at least a basic level of training. Mr. Koenig noted that once employees have met the basic level, they can seek more advanced levels of training. He explained that this funding had been reinstated, with the understanding of each department head that it must be used for training. Mr. Koenig stated that managers had generally met challenges and sent people to training. He reiterated that employees must meet managers halfway, and managers have to hold employees accountable to get training to qualify for the next level within the organization. Review of the Pay System Mr. Hutchison recommended that the City complete an internal review of the market value of all City of Dover employees to assess whether or not they are at market value. He suggested that the City compare the market with the State of Delaware, Kent County Levy Court, City of Wilmington, City of Newark, and City of Milford. Mr. Hutchison expressed his opinion that once an individual reaches market value, they should be redlined. He explained that the individual would be entitled to bonuses but not an increase in base salary. Mr. Hutchison suggested that the Committee should meet with the City Manager and Controller/Treasurer to address this issue. Mr. Hare questioned whether Mr. Hutchison would be opposed to including additional cities, such as Smyrna and Lewes, to the review. Responding, Mr. Hutchison stated that he would not be opposed to additional cities; however, it was his opinion that the comparison should be done within Delaware. Mr. Hare suggested that the cities should have similar tax situations as the City of Dover, noting that the City of Wilmington’s tax bracket was a little higher than the City of Dover and they also have a City wage tax. He stated that the City of Newark would be a good comparison. In response to Mr. Hare, Mr. Hutchison explained that he had suggested the cities of Wilmington and Newark because they are the same size as the City of Dover, in terms of land, and they also face many of the same issues as the City of Dover. Mr. Sudler moved to recommend that the Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee review other cities in order to complete a comparison of the pay for the City’s employees versus other cities’ employees. The motion was seconded by Ms. Maucher. Mr. Sudler moved to amend the motion to include a recommendation to create a list of cities that members deem appropriate to review for recommendations. The motion was seconded by Ms. Maucher. Mr. Shevock questioned who would compile this information and bring it back to the Committee. Responding, Mr. Hare clarified that the motion before the Committee was to get the list of positions from Mr. Hutchison before moving forward.

LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 12 The motion to recommend that the Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee review other cities in order to complete a comparison of the pay for the City’s employees versus other city employees, as amended to include that a list of cities be created that members deem appropriate to review for recommendations was unanimously carried. Review of Planning Application, Zoning Verification, Itinerant Merchant, Safe Communities, Residential Vacant Building and Housing Violation Fees Mrs. Ann Marie Townshend, Director of Planning and Community Development, stated that this item and the next item, Review of Planning and Inspections Fees (by December 31, 2015), were really the same item. She advised that she had begun work on this and would be prepared to bring a recommendation forward to the Committee in late July. By unanimous consent, the Committee deferred consideration of this matter. Review of Planning and Inspections Fees (by December 31, 2015) Mrs. Ann Marie Townshend, Director of Planning and Community Development, stated that this item and the previous item, Review of Planning Application, Zoning Verification, Itinerant Merchant, Safe Communities, Residential Vacant Building and Housing Violation Fees, were really the same item. She advised that she had begun work on this and would be prepared to bring a recommendation forward to the Committee in late July. By unanimous consent, the Committee deferred consideration of this matter. Timeline for Review of Fiscal Year 2016/17 Budget Mr. Hare proposed having a preliminary budget by February 1, 2016, to allow more time for review. Mr. Scott Koenig, City Manager, advised that any request to compress the time would create a set of challenges for staff. He informed members that it takes staff several months to compile and review the information, which must then be formatted for members of Council. Mr. Koenig stated that changing the budget timeline would add more uncertainty, explaining that if Council would like to see a budget in February, all of the numbers would have to be finalized by January, which would result in the budget being compiled based on only five (5) to six (6) months of current year revenue and expense. Based on his experience over the last four (4) years, Mr. Koenig stated that the compressed period would cause the City to make decisions in a strict time frame. Mr. Hare stated that his intention was not to have a full budget or even exact numbers by February or even March 1st. He simply wanted to know what the department heads were projecting for the fiscal year, explaining that he would like a head start if the City was going to have an unexpected $2M expense. Mr. Koenig advised that the FY 2015/2016 operating budgets were basically status quo because that was the budget direction that was provided to staff last fall. He explained that the original budget direction was for a 2% reduction in operating budgets; however, that got off track when the City added officers mid-year. Mr. Koenig stated that he could provide a projection in February, noting

LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MEETING OF JUNE 22, 2015 PAGE 13 that his expectation would be status quo. He noted that there should not be any unplanned $2M increases to any budget unless there is a drastic change in some market, which Council would be made aware of. Mr. Hare suggested having a preliminary budget by April 1, 2016. Mayor Christiansen questioned if a preliminary budget could be delivered by the end of March that would provide a more realistic view of what staff would present at the end of April. Mr. Koenig requested that this item be deferred until the next meeting to allow time for him and Mrs. Mitchell, Controller/Treasurer, to discuss the possibility of delivering the draft budget on April 2, 2016. By unanimous consent, the Committee deferred consideration of this matter until their next meeting. Mr. Hare requested the addition of an item to the next Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee meeting for discussion of the City’s form of government. Responding, Mrs. Traci McDowell, City Clerk, advised that the proposed ordinances and charter amendments related to the City’s form of government were included on the draft agenda for the July 13, 2015 Committee meeting. Mr. Sudler moved for adjournment, seconded by Mr. Cole and unanimously carried. Meeting adjourned at 7:05 p.m. William F. Hare Chairman WFH/TM/dd S:\AGENDAS-MINUTES-PACKETS-PRESENTATIONS-ATT&EXH\Committee-Minutes\2015\06-22-2015 LF&A.wpd

Monthly Report May 2015 Office of City Assessor

Assessor’s Report Number of Deeds Stamped for Transfer Tax Dollar Amount for the Month of May 2014/2015 the Month of May 2014/2015 $100 $83 50 43 Thousands 40 27 $50 23 24 $50 $39 30 $12 20 9 10 $12 $6 $11 5 2 3 2014 $0 2014 10 0 $0 0 2015 2015 First Time Buyer for the Month May 2014/2015 Realty of May 2014/2015 PropertySales in Dollars 23 24 Received Prior to Recording 25 $6 20 $6 Res. Non‐First $3 Millions $4 $2 15 9 10 Time Buyers $2 $0 $2 $0 $0 $1 2014 10 Res. First Time $0 5 Buyers 2015 0 2014 2015 Major Updates March ‐ 15 April‐ 15 May ‐ 15 Assessment Change $953,200 $0 ‐$87,308,570 Residential Sales Ratio Report Sales in Study Total Assessed Total Sale Price Ratio PRD Value 22 $3,207,000 $3,503,201 0.91 1.09 1

Assessor’s Report 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. Points of Interest Scanning & Filing ‐ All new deeds are being scanned and attached to the CAMA software for easy retrieval. ‐ All appeal documents and correspondence are being scanned and attached to the CAMA software for easy retrieval. ‐ All old property record cards are being scanned and indexed into Fortis. Assessor’s Office Appeals ‐ Appeal Hearings have been completed (see attached spread sheet) 2

JUN 19, 2015 CITY OF DOVER PAGE: 1 12:30 PM SALES RATIO REPORT CA324 PARID NBHD LUC ADDRESS UNITS STYLE YRBLT STORIES SFLA GRADE CDU TOTAL APPR SALE DT PRICE ASR ED05-066.02-01-07.00 18 R10 125 HOBBYHORSE CT 14 2015 1 1748 B+ AV 215,100 20-MAY-15 269,204 .80 ED05-066.02-01-10.00 18 R10 137 HOBBYHORSE CT 1 2015 2 2220 B+ AV 234,100 05-MAY-15 265,797 .88 ED05-067.14-04-22.00 18 R10 19 PIN OAK DR 1 6 1994 2 2450 B- GD 199,700 18-MAY-15 246,000 .81 ED05-067.20-03-21.00 9 R10 415 N NEW ST 1 14 1950 1 825 C- AV 55,900 15-MAY-15 57,000 .98 ED05-068.18-02-14.00 7 R10 822 WHITE OAK RD 1 3 1951 1 1496 C GD 129,900 27-MAY-15 141,000 .92 ED05-068.18-05-11.01 7 R10 65 EDGEMONT AVE 1 14 1990 1 1148 C FR 96,000 08-MAY-15 129,900 .74 ED05-076.03-04-41.00 11 R10 336 GILLIBROOK LN 1 2015 2 3220 B+ AV 276,300 29-MAY-15 320,000 .86 ED05-076.05-03-80.00 14 R10 37 TALLOWICK LN 1 14 1988 1 1324 C AV 132,100 12-MAY-15 149,900 .88 ED05-076.05-07-28.00 3 R10 235 PEBBLE VALLEY PL 1 5 1996 2 2747 A- AV 282,200 28-MAY-15 280,000 1.01 ED05-076.07-01-09.06 2 R10 1179 MADISON CT 1 13 1979 2 1776 C- AV 124,900 09-MAY-15 107,000 1.17 ED05-076.08-02-51.00 9 R10 204 N NEW ST 1 1 1930 2 1366 C- AV 78,100 29-MAY-15 37,000 2.11 ED05-076.08-02-53.00 9 R10 229 CECIL ST 1 1 1930 2 1280 C- FR 39,400 22-MAY-15 34,000 1.16 ED05-076.09-03-10.00 14 R10 409 NORTHDOWN DR 1 14 2014 1 1614 C AV 180,500 28-MAY-15 216,000 .84 ED05-076.13-01-25.00 14 R10 115 TRAFALGAR DR 1 8 1999 2 1734 C+ AV 141,100 07-MAY-15 159,900 .88 ED05-077.06-01-82.00 8 R10 225 BAYARD AVE 1 14 1957 1 1103 C AV 129,300 26-MAY-15 147,000 .88 ED05-077.06-02-20.00 7 R10 767 S HALSEY RD 1 14 1946 1 860 C AV 103,800 19-MAY-15 75,000 1.38 ED05-077.17-02-28.00 5 R10 957 N SUNSET DR 1 16 1956 1 1612 C+ AV 147,300 22-MAY-15 132,600 1.11 ED05-077.17-03-36.00 4 R10 1051 S BRADFORD ST 1 3 1961 1.5 1696 C AV 126,800 08-MAY-15 185,000 .69 ED05-077.17-05-71.00 4 R10 49 ROOSEVELT AVE 1 3 1950 1 828 C- FR 83,700 22-MAY-15 111,000 .75 ED05-085.08-01-59.00 12 R10 524 WESTWOOD PL 1 5 1964 2 1934 B- AV 172,100 26-MAY-15 191,900 .90 ED05-085.12-02-43.00 12 R10 311 MOCKINGBIRD AVE 1 14 1965 1 1276 C AV 122,900 15-MAY-15 100,000 1.23 ED05-085.12-03-19.00 12 R10 323 MIMOSA AVE 1 16 1971 1 2130 C+ AV 135,800 01-MAY-15 148,000 .92

Residential Values after Name PIN # Property Address# 2012 Amount 2015 Amount Reque. Amount Appeal Board Decision DIX THOMAS & KATHRYN ED05‐067.18‐02‐08.00 664 INDEPENDENCE BLVD $178,400 $181,200 $171,646 175,000 Approve DEFFLEY CAROL G ED05‐077.05‐02‐01.00 155 N AMERICAN AVE $178,500 $160,100 $188,508 160,100 DENY LEAHY WAYNE & LIA ED05‐076.13‐01‐54.00 146 THAMES RD $137,500 $115,700 $87,000 115,700 DENY NOT OVER HUTCHINS BETTY ANN ED05‐067.19‐01‐42.00 63 HERITAGE DR $123,300 $103,100 100,000 97,900 Approve SHAHIN NINA & MAZEN ED05‐067.17‐03‐15.00 103 SHINNECOCK RD $286,700 $247,100 $223,100 247,100 DENY THAISS ROGER ED05‐056.20‐01‐33.00 184 MAPLE GLEN DR $238,600 $256,500 $232,200 238,000 revised TOLBERT FREDERICK LC05‐058.18‐01‐23.00 35 KAREN PL $114,300 $97,300 BELOW $70,000 97,300 DENY MOSES DAVID ED05‐077.05‐02‐33.00 46 DELAWARE AVE $155,700 $163,700 $140,000 149,900 revised BRAUN MICHAEL W & WINIFRED M ED05‐068.19‐02‐14.00 103 LINDEN CT $152,800 $138,600 $100,300 138,600 DENY Commercial Values after Name PIN# Property Address# Amount Reque. Amount Appeal Board Decision STEHLE SUSIE ED05-077.09-02-40.00 154 S STATE ST ALLEY $128,700 $113,000 $70,000 85,400 revised DOVER SOUTH COAST PARTNERS GP ED05-057.00-01-31.00 1001 N DUPONT HWY $26,990,500 $26,089,800 $22,877,700 23,071,400 revised 90 SAULSBURY ASSOCIATES LLC ED05-076.07-01-28.00 90 SAULSBURY RD $485,200 $727,700 $375,000 476,500 DOVER BAY COURT PLAZA LLC ED05-077.00-01-16.00 650 BAY RD $14,400,000 $14,707,600 $5,500,000 8,893,400 revised Exempt Request Name PIN# Property Address # Amount Reque. Amount Board Decision VILLAGE OF WESTOVER HOA MULTIPLE PARCELS OPEN SPACES $213,400 $183,200 $0 0 approve EMERALD POINTE MAINTENANCE CO. MULTIPLE PARCELS OPEN SPACES $118,600 $59,300 $0 0 approve CENTRAL DELAWARE HABITAT FOR HUMANITY ED05-076.08-06-11.00 20 S KIRKWOOD ST $42,300 $42,300 $0 0 approve CENTRAL DELAWARE HABITAT FOR HUMANITY ED05-076.08-06-12.00 28 S KIRKWOOD ST $50,600 $50,600 $0 0 approve CENTRAL DELAWARE HABITAT FOR HUMANITY ED05-076.08-06-13.00 30 S KIRKWOOD ST $35,500 $35,500 $0 0 approve CENTRAL DELAWARE HABITAT FOR HUMANITY ED05-076.08-06-15.00 40-46 S KIRKWOOD ST $74,900 $74,900 $0 0 approve CENTRAL DELAWARE HABITAT FOR HUMANITY ED05-076.12-02-09.00 138 CHERRY ST 23,000 38,200 0 0 approve CENTRAL DELAWARE HABITAT FOR HUMANITY ED05-077.09-01-05.00 117 S QUEEN ST 50,800 58,300 0 0 approve HOUSE OF PRIDE INC ED05-076.08-05-22.00 16 N NEW ST 75,800 54,600 0 54,600 deny HOUSE OF PRIDE INC ED05-077.05-03-10.00 29 S NEW ST 40,700 82,800 0 82,800 deny HOUSE OF PRIDE INC ED05-076.08-05-20.00 20 N NEW ST $65,800 $47,600 0 47,600 deny HOUSE OF PRIDE INC ED05-076.08-05-84.00 38 S NEW ST $88,100 $89,900 0 89,900 deny HOUSE OF PRIDE INC ED05-077.05-03-08.00 37 S NEW ST $37,800 $80,500 0 80,500 deny HOUSE OF PRIDE INC ED05-077.09-01-43.00 115 S NEW ST $186,900 $119,200 0 119,200 deny HOUSE OF PRIDE INC ED05-077.09-01-31.00 110 S NEW ST $69,100 $11,600 0 11,600 deny HOUSE OF PRIDE INC ED05-077.09-01-33.00 106 S NEW ST $77,200 $13,100 0 13,100 deny HOUSE OF PRIDE INC ED05-077.09-01-37.00 105 S NEW ST $165,700 $117,900 0 117,900 deny HOUSE OF PRIDE INC ED05-077.09-01-35.00 102 S NEW ST $137,600 $72,200 0 72,200 deny HOUSE OF PRIDE INC ED05-077.05-03-02.00 55 S NEW ST $72,200 $60,900 0 60,900 deny HOUSE OF PRIDE INC ED05-077.05-03-05.00 45 S NEW ST $99,200 $77,700 0 77,700 deny CENTRAL DELAWARE HABITAT FOR HUMANITY ED05-076.08-04-37.00 29 N KIRKWOOD ST $0 0 0 approve CENTRAL DELAWARE HABITAT FOR HUMANITY ED05-076.08-05-29.00 223 W DIVISION $117,200 $107,800 0 0 approve

Stipulations Name Pin# Property Address # Amount Reque. Amount SHIRLIZ LLC ED05‐077.07‐06‐99.00 NOB HILL RD $95,000 $74,800 $33,500 31,900 BMKR LLC ED05-077.18-01-48.00 1030 S DUPONT HWY $525,000 $573,600 555,800 MARCUS VON SCHNURBEIN ED05-077.05-04-31.00 29 S STATE ST $362,700 $382,100 $325,000 324,800 WERDEN ANNA M ED05-068.18-02-60.00 158 N HALSEY RD $39,200 $32,400 $23,000 24,300 HARRINGTON FAMILY TRUST TIES LL ED05-087.06-01-15.00 1197 JANES RD $73,000 $65,400 $55,000 61,600 HARRINGTON FAMILY TRUST TIES LL ED05-087.06-01-12.00 1212 JANES RD $72,300 $66,300 $55,000 62,600 HARRINGTON FAMILY TRUST TIES LL ED05-087.06-01-13.00 1230 JANES RD $90,000 $69,200 $60,000 64,600 GIA DOWNTOWN PROPERTIES LLC ED05-077.09-02-50.00 109 S BRADFORD ST $147,800 $148,100 $126,000 129,900 GIA DOWNTOWN PROPERTIES LLC ED05-077.05-01-40.00 107 N STATE ST $218,400 $259,400 $195,000 196,400 HARRINGTON CENTER CITY LLC ED05-077.09-02-30.00 109-113 W LOOCKERMAN ST $860,600 $949,200 $725,000 837,800 HARRINGTON FOUR SEASONS LLC ED05-068.09-01-09.03 706 N DUPONT HWY $1,376,800 $1,233,000 $1,100,000 1,151,600 HARRINGTON COMMMERCIAL LLC ED05-076.08-01-22.01 19 RIDGELY ST $185,100 $194,300 $150,000 160,500 HARRINGTON CENTER CITY LLC ED05-077.09-03-26.00 418 S GOVERNORS AVE $152,900 $185,900 $105,000 146,600 HARRINGTON CENTER CITY LLC ED05-077.09-03-25.00 422 S GOVERNORS AVE $524,000 $599,600 $310,000 485,600 HARRINGTON CENTER CITY LLC ED05-076.08-01-21.00 37 RIDGLEY ST $780,200 $789,800 $780,000 781,700 CATO DEVELOPMENT INC ED05-076.11-02-61.00 1200-1218 FOREST ST $2,610,100 $2,780,300 2,273,400 DOVER DELAWARE RETAIL LLC ED05-068.09-01-34.00 515 N DUPONT HWY $6,209,000 $5,204,200 $2,881,800 2,885,200 RES-STATE STREET COMMONS LLC & SSS-STATE STREET COMMONS LLC ED05-077.09-03-70.00 502 S STATE ST $1,897,300 $4,508,500 $2,000,000 2,000,000 BMKR LLC ED05-077.17-01-48.00 834 S GOVERNORS AVE $1,193,000 $1,056,000 927,100 BMKR LLC ED05-077.18-01-49.00 1032 S DUPONT HWY $1,575,000 $1,591,400 1,087,700 Withdrawals Name Pin# Property Address # Amount Reque. Amount ENNIS BUSINESS ASSOCIATES LLC ED05-076.11-02-22.00 1116 FORREST AVE $144,100 $158,400 158,400 ENNIS BUSINESS ASSOCIATES LLC ED05-076.11-02-20.01 1126 FORREST AVE $210,000 $251,200 97,700 clerical ENNIS BUSINESS ASSOCIATES LLC ED05-076.11-02-20.00 1124 FORREST AVE $90,000 $125,000 $0 30,500 clerical ENNIS BUSINESS ASSOCIATES LLC ED05-076.11-02-21.00 LAND FORREST AVE $43,000 $32,700 $0 32,700 ENNIS BUSINESS ASSOCIATES LLC ED05-076.11-02-59.00 1128 FORREST AVE $155,400 $153,100 153,100 ENNIS BUSINESS ASSOCIATES LLC ED05-076.11-02-23.00 3.63 AC FORREST AVE $160,300 $92,800 92,800 HARRINGTON CENTER CITY LLC ED05-068.17-02-51.00 300 N STATE ST $534,500 $613,600 $600,000 613,600 HARRINGTON DOWNTOWN PROPERTIES LLC ED05-077.09-03-24.00 426 S GOVERNORS AVE $81,500 $81,400 $70,000 81,400 $66,851,200 $50,223,600

CITY MANAGER’S MONTHLY REPORT MAY 2015 City Manager’s Monthly Report, May 2015

Customer Services  In the month of May, we processed 3,371 credit card payments for the month totaling $714,802.09. Human Resources  Continued contract negotiations Library  562 attended 55 programs for adults.  655 attended 30 programs for teens.  977 attended 26 programs for children.  25 volunteers completed 324 hours of service.  404 attended 53 programs/classes coordinated through the Job Center. Public Works  Working on CIP and additional funding for future street program and other projects. 2 City Manager’s Monthly Report, May 2015

CUSTOMER SERVICES WORK ORDERS PROCESSED Extensions of Credit 398 3,000 382 400 358 316 308 292 300 2,500 2,018 2,161 2,053 300 268 1,882 1,855 1,861 2,000 1,776 1,749 202 211 208 1,570 1,599 1,630 1,437 200 1,500 1,298 1,000 100 500 May- Jun- Jul- Aug- Sep- Oct- Nov- Dec- Jan- Feb- Mar- Apr- May- 0 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 15 15 15 15 15 May- Jun- Jul- Aug- Sep- Oct- Nov- Dec- Jan- Feb- Mar- Apr- May- 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 15 15 15 15 15 CUSTOMER PAYMENT USAGE CUTS FOR NON PAYMENT $1,971,399 80,000 $2,000,000 56,063 57,892 60,000 $1,600,000 40,000 $1,200,000 25,266 25,425 21,09318,969 $800,000 20,000 $431,855 1,651 3,383 $400,000 $246,469 0 Drive-Thru Over the Mail, Drop Credit Bank $- Window Counter Box Cards Drafts May 2015 May 2014 FYTD15 FYTD14 2015 YTD 2014YTD FY 2015 FY 2014 Major Program Updates May 2015 May 2014 Difference Year-to-Date Year-to-Date Number of Customers Served 21,633 21,233 400 230,952 232,419 Final Bills 667 696 (29) 7,095 6,993 Estimated Bills 169 177 (8) 1,912 1,883 Penalties Posted $ 14,935 $ 18,793 (3,859) $ 199,964 $ 215,053 Extensions of Credit - Amount Extended $ 116,275 $ 95,197 21,078 $ 960,103 $ 844,522 Balance Transfers $ 2,199 $ 11,945 (9,746) $ 65,493 $ 62,751 Utility Collections $ 28,162 $ 26,596 1,567 $ 633,207 $ 272,787 Special Assessments $ - $ - - $ - $ - Miscellaneous Billings $ 120,361 $ 32,149 88,212 $ 1,104,843 $ 1,246,978 CNP through Disconnect Collars $ - $ 14 (14) - 202 Court Cases - - - - - Tamperings - - - - 4 Taxes Levied (includes carry forward) $ 432,593 $ 250,968 181,625 $ 10,914,236 $ 10,914,236 Billing Adjustments $ (836) $ (16) (820) $ 27,727 $ 27,727 Total Taxes Collected $ 26,833 $ 28,305 (1,471) $ 10,719,316 $ 10,719,316 Taxes Outstanding $ 404,924 $ 222,647 182,276 $ 222,647 $ 222,647 Payments in Lieu $ - $ - - $ 10,000 $ - City Manager’s Monthly Report, May 2015 3

HUMAN RESOURCES May June July August Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar April May Category Total 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 15 15 15 15 15 Caucasian* 290 292 291 290 290 291 288 290 287 286 289 289 291 N/A * Minorities 58 58 58 58 61 61 61 62 63 62 63 61 63 N/A Hired 1 3 1 1 5 5 0 5 1 0 9 5 9 36 Terminated/ Resigned/ 0 1 2 2 2 4 3 2 3 2 5 7 4 45 Retired/Other Transferred/ 1 0 0 1 0 3 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 11 Promoted Jobs Posted 2 3 4 4 2 3 3 3 3 2 7 2 2 40 Workers Comp. Inju- 1 1 2 2 1 2 5 1 1 3 3 3 2 27 ries Workers Comp. Hours 51 130 86 160 51 22 32 2 17 29 312 97 231 1220 Insurance Claims 6 4 0 1 4 1 1 5 4 1 3 0 2 32 Full-time Employees: 330 Part-time Employees: 24 (3 Pitts Center, 1 Recreation, 10 Library, 3 Customer Service, 1 Central Services, (6) Police Department) -Numbers do not reflect, temporary, seasonal, relief fire dispatchers, committee or council members. Positions Posted: AS/400 System Operator (shared Police & IT); Customer Service Clerk II (In-House) Positions Hired: (6) Police Cadets (part-time), Central Services Coordinator (Police Department), Administrative Assistant (Human Resources); (Customer Service Clerk II, part-time) Position Resigned/Retires: Police Officer, System Operation II (Electric Department); Motor Equipment Operator (Sanitation); Library Clerk I (part-time) Recruitment Information (Positions closed in May) American Hispan- Asian/Pacific In Out Position Total Female Male Unknown Black White Indian/Alaskan Unknown ic Islander Dover Dover Native Customer Service Clerk II (In- 2 2 - - - 2 - - - - - 2 House) Human Resources Generalist 36 33 3 - 12 17 1 1 1 4 17 19 Unfilled/Open Positions by Department* Unfilled/Open Positions May Jun July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar April May By Department 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 15 15 15 15 15 Electric 5 5 4 5 25 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 3 Public Works 11 10 11 11 12 11 12 12 12 13 15 13 17 Police 1 1 0 2 2 0 1 1 10 10 4 4 2 All Other Departments 4 2.5 4 3.5 4.5 5 5 3 3 4.5 4.5 5 4 Totals 21 18.5 20 21.5 23.5 21 20 18 28 29.5 26.5 24 26 *Not used for Budgeting Purposes ² The following has been updated to reflected the Fiscal 2014-15 Budget Electric: Electrical Engineer, Engineering & System Operations Superintendent, System Operator Public Works: (2) Utility Maintenance Mechanic I/Wastewater, Crew Leader (Sanitation), Civil Engineer l, Field Supervisor II (Grounds), Environmental Scientist, Public Works Inspector (Public Works), Motor Equipment Operator I (Streets), Motor Equipment Operator II (Streets), (2) Motor Equipment Operator I (Sanitation), Nursery Person II (Grounds), Field Supervisor I (Streets), Mechanic I, Motor Equipment I Water/wastewater, Utility Maintenance Mechanic Water Treatment Plant, Water Treatment Plant Operator II Police: (2) Police Officer *Police Officer (4) 9/2015 All Other Departments: Customer Service Clerk II (part-time); Librarian II, LAN Analyst (IT), Service Center Clerk (Pitts Center, part-time) Administrative Assistant (Information Technology) 4 City Manager’s Monthly Report, May 2015

HUMAN RESOURCES continued Turnover Statistics 2010 2011 2012* 2013 * 2014 2015 Total Turnover % 5.57 6.75 11.00 10.91 6.02 5.98 Termination Turnover % 0.27 1.08 0.29 1.47 .57 0 Resignation Turnover % 2.12 4.05 5.21 5.01 2.29 3.13 Retirement Turnover % 3.18 1.62 5.50 4.42 3.15 .85 * Healthcare cost sharing implemented ** Healthcare cost sharing implemented for DOE Average Employees 2010 2011 2012* 2013* 2014 2015 Total Number of Employees Separating from Service 21 25 38 37 21 21 Average Number of Full-time Employees 362 356 333 325 331 331 Average Number of Part-time Employees 16 15 12 14 18 20 * Healthcare cost sharing implemented City Manager’s Monthly Report, May 2015 5

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY Service Requests Resolved Citizen Action Center - Customers w/ New Issues 200 188 150 164 130 150 128 125 111 120 116 121 110 102 100 91 90 91 90 160 70 122 130 112 108 95 50 50 13 73 78 30 50 53 42 0 10 May- Jun- Jul- Aug- Sep- Oct- Nov- Dec- Jan- Feb- Mar- Apr- May- May- Jun- Jul- Aug- Sep- Oct- Nov- Dec- Jan- Feb- Mar- Apr- May- 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 15 15 15 15 15 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 15 15 15 15 15 Programming Requests Completed Page Views - City of Dover Web Page 30 28 35,000 25 30,000 22 18 18 19 25,000 20 Pages Viewed 16 17 16 15 20,000 13 31,605 31,423 31,600 31,423 15 12 27,911 28,026 28,370 11 26,428 25,426 26,428 27,275 10 15,000 23,955 23,845 10 10,000 5 5,000 0 0 May- Jun- Jul- Aug- Sep- Oct- Nov- Dec- Jan- Feb- Mar- Apr- May- May- Jun- Jul- Aug - Sep - Oct- Nov- Dec- Jan- Feb- Mar- Apr - May- 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 15 15 15 15 15 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 15 15 15 15 15 Current Performance Indicators Last Month Same Month Month Last Year iSeries Availability 100% 100% 100% Server Availability 100% 100% 100% AS/400 Connections (concurrent/authorized users) N/A N/A N/A PCs Supported 372 372 364 Scheduled PCs Replaced - - - Servers Supported 30 30 19 People Trained 21 8 18 Availability Statistics based on 7:00 AM until 5:00 PM Monday—Friday 6 City Manager’s Monthly Report, May 2015

LIBRARY Reference Transactions 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 Adult Teen Children May 15 Adults – 1,550 Teens – 341 Children – 649 Circulation May 15 FYTD 15 May 14 FYTD 14 Dover residents 17,931 219,985 19,382 232,211 Ebooks 2,198 22,577 1,636 15,546 Kent residents* 11,008 145,491 13,965 165,432 Non-county residents 1,723 21,383 2,198 26,055 Registrations Dover residents 271 3,790 320 4,050 Kent residents* 37 427 35 729 Non-county residents 3 65 5 78 Other Visiting Patrons 25,330 305,564 26,434 323,719 Meeting Room Usage 1,889 19,804 1,739 22,609 Photocopier Usage 1,298 12,392 1,270 13,409 Computer Printing Usage 3,247 35,154 3,133 30,810 Computer Users 4,346 51,634 4,641 51,539 Wireless Computer Users 1,799 19,305 1,501 14,796 Holds (Total) 6,241 71,809 6,384 74,924 *Breakout of Kent County Residential Statistics Circulation Registrations Harrington: 96 Harrington: 1 Milford: 131 Milford: 0 Smyrna: 647 Smyrna: 0 Outside City Limits: 10,134 Outside City Limits: 36 Total Registered Users: (Card Holders) City: 27,185 Kent County: 12,903 Outside Kent County: 1,073 Other Points of Interest: Inter/Interlibrary: 74 items loaned out Technical services: 2,293 items added 29 items borrowed 802 items deleted Volunteers: 324 hours of service completed City Manager’s Monthly Report, May 2015 7

PUBLIC WORKS Administration Administrative review and inspection services continued on all residential and commercial developments. The following residential subdivisions are in various phases of construction: Oak Shadows Emerald Pointe Eden Hill (Residential) Patriot Village Clearview Meadows Village of Cannon Mill Sanitation Monthly Total Refuse (Tons) Sanitation Hours 1,500 1200 927 1000 1,000 895 875 869 835 827 834 848 726 717 733 800 648 598 550 541 600 446 441 500 356 292 400 171 168 205 166 151 166 173 135 211 217 177 160 110 200 27 38 - 0 Bulk Collection Mechanized Hand Trash Container Collection Collection Repair/Delivery Bulk Automated May 15 May 14 MAY 15 FYTD 15 MAY 14 FYTD 14 Trips to DSWA Sandtown Landfill 176 1,968 192 2,230 Total Tonnage to DSWA 1,045.84 10,597.42 1,098.46 11,223.75 90-Gallon Containers Delivered 23 312 26 232 300-Gallon Containers Delivered 0 43 8 39 Total Man Hours-containers Delivered 27 370 38 402 CURBSIDE RECYCLING TOTAL # OF TOTAL # OF STATS HOUSEHOLDS ACCOUNTS WEIGHT/LBS. AVE. LBS. COLLECTED May 2015 19,077 9,124 248,580 13.03 8 City Manager’s Monthly Report, May 2015

PUBLIC WORKS continued Streets MAY 15 FYTD 15 MAY 14 FYTD 14 Signed Installed 17 311 39 371 Signs Repaired 0 116 17 136 Curbs Painted Yellow (feet) 3,093 15,845 8,335 20,904 New Post Installed 3 39 9 64 Storm Catch Basins Repaired 4 14 4 18 Storm Catch Basin Repairing (Hrs.) 39 157 39 137 Storm Catch Basins Cleaned 3 185 3 1,548 Storm Catch Basins Cleaning (Hrs.) 3 117 3 577 Hot Mix Patching (Tons) 0 0 0 0.50 Hot Mix Patching (Hrs.) 0 0 0 0 Cold Mix Patching Hrs.) 8 262 8 273 Concrete Work (Hrs) 60 165 60 299 Concrete Patching (Cubic Yards) 0 1 0 8 Ditch Work (Hrs). 0 39 0 36 Street and Alley Maintenance (Hrs) 160 660 160 1,132 Street Sweeping (Miles) 1,558 9,062 1,558 9,480 Street Sweeping (Cubic Yards) 390 2,122 390 2,242 Leaves Collected (Cubic Yards) 0 7,638 0 14,230 Leaf Collection (Miles) 0 4,361 0 5,095 Grounds Total Work Orders = 13 General = 6 Arborist = 7 Arborist Crew May 2015 May 2014 Trees Trimmed 8 24 Trees Removed 6 1 Stumps Removed 4 0  Mowed grass a good portion of the month  Injected Elm trees Beautification Crew  Dig up tulips from beds  Tilled up flower beds  Planted flower beds Mowing Crew  Mowed grass at various city locations  Sprayed weeds City Manager’s Monthly Report, May 2015 9

PUBLIC WORKS continued Geographic Information Systems (GIS) Code Enforcement Create Inspection feature class for use with tablets Code Enforcement Created a web map and collector app for the Code Enforcement Inspections feature class Code Enforcement Modified Vacant and Demolished Building Feature Classes as well as the web map Electric Department Went to Electric Admin Building to troubleshoot problems. Reconnected some network drives. Public Works Checked sewer data and made changes as needed Public Works GIS Worked on creating a report to display the fields in the Rentals Inspection layer. Intended for use my PM Inspectors Public Works GIS Updated the parcels, rentals & active AHI for the month. Public Works GIS Represented the City at the DGDC meeting. Offered brief description of current City GIS initiatives. Public Works GIS Attended the Delaware GIS User Group meeting with Mark Fleet and Facilities Management PM Work Orders Completed: 6 Number of Tire Repairs: 8 Number of Road Repairs: 5 Other Work Orders: 56 Repair Hours: 146.1 Road Repair Hours: 5 Total Work Orders: 62 Fabrication Hours: 4 Misc. Hours: N/A PM Hours: 12 # Of Scheduled PM’s: 33 # Of Scheduled PM’s Completed: 0 Major Program Updates MEASURE May 2015 May 2014 DIFFERENCE Fleet Maintenance - Scheduled 0 out of 33 Preventative Maintenance appoint- 0% 9 out of 24 -37.50% ments being kept (Quantity and 37.50.% Percentage) Facilities Maintenance Facilities - Routine work orders 35 out of 35 17 out of 17 completed within 5 days (Quantity 0.% 100 % 100% and Percentage) Facilities - Emergency work orders 1 out of 1 0 out of 0 completed within 2 days (Quantity 0% 100% 100% and Percentage) 10 City Manager’s Monthly Report, May 2015

PUBLIC WORKS continued Water/Wastewater Water Production/Billed Consumption/Flow to Kent County 255000000 205000000 155000000 105000000 55000000 5000000 May 14 Jun 14 Jul 14 Aug 14 Sep 14 Oct 14 Nov 14 Dec 14 Jan 15 Feb 15 Mar 15 Apr 15 May 15 Total Water Prod. Billed Consumpt. Total Flow to County City Readings ENGINEERING SUMMARY Major Program Updates MAY 15 MAY 14 DIFF FY15 YTD FY14 State and Federal Violations 0 violations 0 violations - - - Water Quality Complaints 1 5 -4 112 101 Plan Review Completed With- 9 plans 9 plans 0 104 83 in 30 days of Submission 100% 100% OPERATIONAL SUMMARY Task MAY 15 MAY 14 CURRENT FY 1,487,903,00 Water Production - Daily Average 5,147,806 4,148,839 0 Average Field Response Time (goal is <30 minutes) 25.34 17.68 25.34 Water Mains Repaired 0 1 35 Water Service Lines Repaired 0 4 26 Wastewater Mains Repaired 0 0 7 Wastewater Service Lines Repaired 1 0 6 Sewer Lines Flushed - linear feet 72,703 178,134 1,034,699 Sewer Mains Videoed -linear feet 346 0 3,531 Total Fire Hydrants in Service 1,820 1,818 1,820 Total Water Meters in City Distribution System 14,299 14,202 14,299 City Manager’s Monthly Report, May 2015 11

ELECTRIC DEPARTMENT System Peak Total System Load 200 100,000 152.7 158.2 152.4 73,066 69,215 135.4 135.8 65,617 65,517 128.14 80,000 63,151 62,574 61,012 60,195 60,236 150 114.8 120.6 56,064 55,747 54,958 104.9 104.7 103.8 51,470 101.1 60,000 90.95 100 40,000 50 20,000 May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 15 15 15 15 15 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 15 15 15 15 15 Outages Customers of Gained/Lost 35 8,000 20 18 25 6,000 15 Customers 15 Outages 11 11 11 12 15 4,000 10 7 7 6 5 2,000 4 4 4 5 2 -5 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May 0 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 15 15 15 15 15 0 May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 15 15 15 15 15 Outages Customers Outages: 1 Customers: 347 Electric Monthly Outage Report The annual outage goal will be less than 295 Controllable Outages Average Response Time minutes per customer, which is a Delaware Annual goal is less than 40 Goal is less than 30 minutes Standard. This will be measured by calculating the System Average Interruption Duration Index. Month Year-to-date Month Year-to-date FY 15 YTD FY 14 FY 13 1 26 19 Minutes 26.78 Minutes 45.76 67.76 50.74 MAY 15 MAY 14 FY15 YTD PROGRAM UPDATES Tree Trimming 578 330 4221 Number of Oil Releases 0 1 4 Lost Time Accidents – All Electric Utility Divisions 0 1 0 New Services 12 7 87 12 City Manager’s Monthly Report, May 2015

ELECTRIC DEPARTMENT continued May 2015 Electric (EE Capitol Improvement Projects (CIP) Project Number Description Update Horsepond Progress: Work is Complete EE1308 Substation Progress: Switchgear bids were approved by Council to PEI. Material List and General Scott General Arrangement drawings are approved. EE1312 Switchgear Replacement Schedule: FY15 is for Design |FY16 budget is for construction. Progress: Work activities are moving forward. Going to clear up a few issues on N. Governors Blvd. Capitol Park Schedule: Scheduled for completion May 2015 weather permitting. A few EE1314 Upgrade services on old N. Governors Blvd. section inner loop. Progress: All VIB Caissons installed, 3/5 poles installed and transmission lines GOTP installed. 2 remaining poles to be installed and transmission wire installed and EE1443 Transmission Line terminated by mid-June. Relocation Schedule: Work activities are moving forward. Progress: Surveying complete awaiting plans | Soil boring awaiting dry ground 69kV Rebuild prior to access at request of property owner. | $5000-7000 estimate for crop EE1500 (Horsepond to damage received from farmers Long Point) Schedule: FY15 is for Design |FY16 budget is for construction. Progress: State of Delaware requested project to be delayed to FY16. EE1505 DNREC R&R Schedule: Project on Hold | funds moved for other FY15 projects Progress: All underground distribution work is complete on Kesselring Property/New Burton Road |Work to begin on Saulsbury Road. West Dover EE1509 Connector - State of DE Schedule: Planning on starting on Saulsbury Road after Playtex & Garrison Oak. Progress: City crews continuing the installation of pads/equipment Town Point EE1513 Distribution Feeders Schedule: Project is under construction Progress: No other work can proceed in development without contractor installing conduit Chestnut Grove EE1516 Subdivision Schedule: Not Scheduled | Contractor responsible for conduit installation in development Progress: Currently investigating the cables placement & engineering design. 69kV Cable Re- Design is FY15 budget. EE1520 placement – North St. Substation Schedule: FY16 construction to begin. Progress: Conduit and pads installed on east side of East Entrance and Garrison Oak Tech- installation to begin on conduit on west side in June. EE1522 nical Park Infra- structure Phase 2 Schedule: Work activities are moving forward. City Manager’s Monthly Report, May 2015 13

ELECTRIC DEPARMENT continued Progress: Currently design is complete | Material has been allocated | Fees have been received for Phase I. Lenders Lake EE1524 Apartments Schedule: No Work Scheduled | Contractor responsible for conduit installa- tion in development Progress: Received signed agreements | poles installed on south feeder & neutral wire installed. Boring of Railway to be done in June. EE1526 Playtex Addition Schedule: Changing daily with latest completion requested for Mid September of 2015 | Expecting a preliminary response by April 1st from Norfolk Southern Railway (expected to take 6-8 months). DAFB Temporary Progress: Work is Complete EE1527 Concrete Plant W. Denney's Progress: Work is Complete EE1529 Bridge Project - State of DE Bay Health URD Progress: Work is Complete EE1530 Relocation Windstream DAFB/ Progress: Work is Complete EE1531 College Road Dover Litho Pad Progress: Work is Complete EE1532 Sites 1 & 2 DE State Police Progress: Work is Complete EE1533 Generator Project Hardees Rte 13 Progress: Work is Complete EE1534 Damage Eden Hill Lights Progress: Work is Complete EE1535 Phase 1 Progress: Preliminary Design complete & Fee Schedule established. Waiting on owner to agree to fees prior to any further work on project. This is the 3rd Troutman time customer requested & previous (2) two instances, customer declined. EE1536 Machines Schedule: No work scheduled Progress: Preliminary Design complete. Kirby & Holloway EE1537 Restaurant Schedule: No work scheduled Progress: Currently in Design North Street EE1538 Sidewalk Improvements Schedule: No Work Scheduled Progress: Preliminary design is complete. Waiting on owner to agree to Keystone project prior to any continuation of work. EE1539 Automotive Schedule: No Work Scheduled 14 City Manager’s Monthly Report, May 2015

ELECTRIC DEPARMENT continued Progress: Currently design is complete College Road EE1540 Substation PT Replacement Schedule: Waiting on Material Blue Hen Progress: Some work has been performed on Phase 1. EE1541 Corporate Ctr. Schedule: Work activities are moving forward. Westminster Progress: Work is Complete EE1542 Village Progress: Primary wire and transformers installed. House services installed in Habitat for June with customer is ready. EE1543 Humanity S. Kirkwood St. Schedule: Work activities are moving forward. Progress: Currently design is complete Nottingham EE1544 Meadows - Wellington Ave Schedule: No Work Scheduled | Contractor responsible for conduit installation in development Progress: Light brackets were delivered May 29th, 2015. Installation to begin in June. Firefly Lights - EE1545 Persimmon Tree Schedule: Scheduled for June 2015. Progress: Contractor has installed conduit, equipment pads are on site awaiting Contractor installation. EE1546 DelTech Signs Schedule: Work activities are moving forward. Progress: Contractor has installed conduit, equipment pads are on site NBR Properties awaiting Contractor installation. EE1547 New Burton Rd Schedule: Work activities are moving forward. City Manager’s Monthly Report, May 2015 15

City Planner’s Monthly Report Planning, Inspections & Recreation MAY 2015 Planning, Inspections & Recreation Highlights  National Bicycle Month - Working with the Bicycle Pedestrian Subcommi ee and its part‐ ners, we successfully hosted our third annual Bike to Work Day with two organized rides for par cipants mee ng in front of the Library and Dover’s first Ride of Silence event which boosted 26 riders for bring‐ ing awareness to motorist and cyclists. Both events included faces familiar to the City of Dover family such as Jody Stein, Andy Seigel, Ann Marie Townshend, Carolyn Courtney, Tracy Lisiecki, John Grinstead, Velvet Brown, Kathy Doyle, and Jamie Roy (former employee). Thank yous are extended to Kent County EMS, DelDOT and Dover Police Department for their assistance in making these rides successful. In addi‐ on, the Dover Elks Lodge 1903 hosted Youth Bike Rodeo. Promo ng safety, Bike Werx sent staff to give a safety talk on how to properly maintain a bike, re pressure, helmet fit, and more. DelDOT was on site with an obstacle course that promo ng safe riding and encouraged proper riding techniques. The Elks distributed 18 helmets, 14 bikes, 21 sets of front & tail bike lights to Dover youth.  Community Events in Silver Lake Park - Girls on The Run hosted a run for approximately 350 teen girls promo ng healthy lifestyles and confidence. The Dover Elks Lodge 1903 hosted their annual Jack Conrad Youth Fishing Derby in which 36 kids fished for prizes and special awards, this is a free event. Both organiza ons have stated they are looking forward to returning to Silver Lake Park in 2016.  Dover Days - Staff assisted Kent County Tourism with logis cs to ensure the 2015 event was again a successful community experience.  NASCAR Race — Staff from the Office of the Fire Marshal, and the Code Enforcement and Permi ng & Licensing (Business Licensing of I nerant Merchants) were involved in NASCAR Race event ac vi es were held May 29‐31th.  Signage for The Green— The wayside signage for The Green as part of the First State Na onal Heritage Park has been installed. A celebra on ceremony was held on May 29, 2015.  On May 12, 2015 Velvet Brown, Jared Boesenberg, Greg Akers, Kristen Mullaney, Chris Sco , Mike McGregor, David McGinnis, and Tim Taraila a ended the Lead Base Paint Presenta on in the City Hall Conference Room.  On May 19, 2015 Ron Coburn and David McGinnis a ended IPMC 101 Training in New Cumberland,Pennsylvania.  On May 27, 2015 Bill Cook and Angela Mangan a ended NIMS Training in Smyrna, Delaware.  On May 28, 2015 Velvet Brown and Jared Boesenberg a ended NIMS Training in Smyrna, Delaware.  On May 28, 2015 Dawn Melson‐Williams a ended the CHAD Research Event, hosted by the University of Dela‐ ware’s Center for Historic Architecture and Design. Graduate student research, documenta on, and historic preserva on projects were presented.  On May 26‐28 Tracey Harvey a ended the Environmental Training, in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

Planning, Inspections & Recreation Revenue FY '15 Budget FY '15 Actual Revenue Stream Business License $1,460,000 $ 1,399,715 Looking Forward….. 96% Trailer License $23,000 $ 19,908 87%  Summer Camps Building Permits $565,000 $ 598,417 106%  Silver Lake Clean Up Cert. of Occupancy $6,200 $ 7,320 118% Public Occupancy $10,000 $ 10,183 102% Event Lodging House $16,000 $ 14,605 91% Plumbing/Heating/Air $75,000 $ 63,667 85% Sprinkler $35,000 $ 25,218 72% Rental Inspection Fee $345,000 $ 352,764 102% Miscellaneous $30,000 $ 42,015 140% Fire Protection Fees $31,000 $ 31,924 103% Vacant Building Reg. $60,000 $ 133,500 223% Total P&I Revenue $2,656,200 $ 2,699,235.71 102% Recreation $148,800 $ 125,959 85% PLANNING OFFICE The Planning Office is part of the review process for certain types of construction activity permits (Building Permits, Sign Permits, etc.) and Certificate of Occupancy permits. For May 2015, Planning Staff was involved with review of 108 Permits and 16 Certificates of Occupancy permits. (2015 calendar year total of 374 Permits and CO’s compared to 328 for 2014). Planning Staff also reviews new applications for Business Licenses and Rental Dwelling Permits. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IMPLEMENTATION Planning Staff continues to focus on the various implementation items identified in the 2008 Comprehensive Plan as amended.  On-going efforts of the Planning Office include and research for future ordinance amend- ments related to the Recreational and Commercial (RC) zone and temporary activities.  The Planning Office is also involved in the following studies and projects: City Recrea- tional Needs Assessment, Restoring Central Dover Community Plan, and Transportation Improvement Districts.

Construction Activity  Project work remains to complete the site improvements at the new Dover High School for the eastern areas of the site including the baseball/softball field areas. Temporary Certifi- cates of Occupancy are in place with conditions. (C-10-05/S-11-18)  For the Leander Lakes Apartments project, the foundation and building construction has started on the community center building and two apartment buildings. The Building Per- mit for another apartment building was issued. The apartment complex is located south of Forrest Avenue/Route 8 and west of Dover High Drive. (S-12-18)  The Planning Staff continues to participate in coordination conference calls with Calpine regarding the Garrison Energy Center project at 450 Garrison Oak Drive (Lot 7 of the Gar- rison Oak Technical Park). The project construction is in the final stages for the Garrison Energy Center Phase 1 (S-12-17). The Planning Office is awaiting receipt of State DNREC permits for the Above Ground Storage Tank before approving the Administrative Site Plan (S-14-20) for the addition of a Fuel Oil Tank.  Construction activities are in the final stages at the Uzin Utz Manufacturing facility at 200 Garrison Oak Drive (Lot 12 of the Garrison Oak Technical Park). In late May, the staff of the Planning, Inspections, and Fire Marshal’s Office visited the site to begin the inspec- tions that will lead to the Certificate of Occupancy. (S-13-20)  Certificate of Occupancy inspections were also completed for the Solid Rock Baptist Church Community Center Building (C-13-07) and the Delaware State University Applied Optics Research (OSCAR) Building (S-13-02). DSU Applied Op cs Research Building Solid Rock Bap st Church Community Center Building

BOARD AND COMMISSION ACTIVITY Planning Commission The Planning Commission met on May 18, 2015. However, due to a lack of quorum at the April 20, 2015 meeting those agenda items were postponed until the May meeting of the Commission. The next Planning Commission meeting is scheduled for June 15, 2015. The fol- lowing applications were considered:  S-13-06 US Gas at 461 North DuPont Highway – Approved a Request for a one year extension of the Planning Commission approval granted on April 15, 2013 for Site Development Plan to allow for the ad- dition of a fenced paved area. The project is working through the Check Print Review process to achieve Final Site Plan approval.  Z-15-01 Lands of 801 Gold Coast, LLC at 801 North State Street: Rezoning from RG-3 to C-2A - Recommended Approval to City Council for rezoning from RG-3 to C-2A.  SB-15-01 Lands of Michael E. Camisky at 5096 Hazlettville Road— Moved to grant conditional ap- proval of the Minor Subdivision Plan to create four residential lots in accordance with the conditions of approval outlined in the DAC report.  S-15-04 Dover Town Center at 1574 North DuPont Highway—Granted conditional approval of a Site Plan to construct a restaurant building and a commercial building and to reconfigure the existing retail structure to create multiple tenant spaces along with site improvements for vehicle and pedestrian circula- tion and landscaping. Action on the redevelopment of the old Walmart site also included approval of re- duction in the width of the Arterial Street Buffer.  S-15-05 North Street Mini Storage at 1351 West North Street—Granted conditional approval of a Site Plan for a self-storage facility of 519 units, associated office, and RV & boat storage parking.  MI-15-07 Northgate Center Parcel Consolidation and Right-of-Way Abandonment –Recommended approval to City Council for a Parcel Consolidation of 7 parcels and the Right-of-Way Abandonment of a portion of Krisko Circle and to include the waiver request related to the length of dead-end streets.  Z-15-02 Lands of Blue Hen Apt, LLC and Blue Hen CC, LLC and Read Street LLC: Rezoning from RM-2 and SC-3 with SWPOZ to RG-2 and SC-2 with SWPOZ –Recommended approval to City Council on Z-15-02 Lands of Blue Hen Apt, LLC and Blue Hen CC, LLC and Read Street LLC: Rezon- ing from RM-2 and SC-3 with SWPOZ to RG-2 and SC-2 with SWPOZ as submitted.  S-15-07 Eden Hill TND: Residential District – Revised Implementation Plan-Moved to grant condi- tional approval of the Revised Implementation Plan for Eden Hill Farm Traditional Neighborhood Design Residential District. Revisions include an increase in the dwelling unit count, a change in the mix of unit types, revisions of the open space design, and revisions to the street layout. Board of Adjustment The Board of Adjustment did not meet on May 20, 2015. The next regular scheduled meeting of the Board of Adjustment is scheduled for June 17, 2015. Historic District Commission The Historic District Commission did not meet on May 21, 2015. The next Historic District Commission meeting is scheduled for June 18, 2015.

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM CDBG FY14 Projects  Homeownership Assistance Program Six (6) first time homebuyers have purchased properties using the Dover First Start Program.  Dover Interfaith Mission for Housing CDBG funds will be used for operations cost for the shelter. This project has been completed.  NCALL Research CDBG funds will be utilized for pre-purchase homeownership counseling services for up to ten (10) Dover residents.  Elizabeth W. Murphey School CDBG funds will be used for the roof replacements for one building on the campus that services children that are at risk for homelessness. This project is completed. Restoring Central Dover Initiative NCALL was awarded the Implementation Grant for the Restoring Central Dover Initia- tive. Five (5) Year Consolidated Plan 2015-2019 HUD has approved the City of Dover’s Five Year Consolidated Plan. Staff is present working on completing the Environmental Reviews for FY15 Action Plan projects. Mayors Challenge to End Veterans Homelessness The Mayor’s Task Force for Ending Veterans Homelessness set a goal to house 22 Veter- ans by June 10, 2015. A 100th Day Celebration has been scheduled for June 12th at the Kent County Levy Court building.

Dangerous Buildings, Vacant Buildings & Demolitions  200 N. West Street—The owners obtained a permit in June of 2014. Since that time mini- mal work has been done to the property and no inspections have been scheduled. The per- mit is due to expire on June 9, 2015. Once the permit expires, the owners will be notified that the property will be taking to City Council for authorization for demolition.  1370 College Road—The property was presented to the Dover City Council on October 25, 2014 as a dangerous building with the recommendation to have the structure demol- ished. The owners of the property appealed before City Council that they wished to keep the property and were willing to make all necessary repairs. City Council agreed with the homeowners and gave them 6 months to make repairs. The six month extension for re- pairs has expired with no work being done. An asbestos survey is scheduled for June 3, 2015 and bids are out for the demolition of the structure.  5 Welch Drive—Demolition is complete.  307 W Division Street —All repairs have been made by the home-owner.  312 W. Loockerman Street—Notice was sent to the lien holders to make repairs to the va- cant structure by January 6, 2015, or City Staff would schedule a date with Council to de- clare the building dangerous and request to have the building demolished. On February 19th the City Historic District Commission ruled that Demolition by Neglect was occur- ring and recommended the owner have 6 months to make repairs or to have the building demolished. On March 9th City Council declared the building dangerous and the owner was given until September 9, 2015 to repair or demolish the building.  363 Rita-Wilma Way—The two abandoned mobile homes on this lot have been con- demned as unfit for human occupancy and boarded. The lien holders and the property owner have been notified to make repairs or demolish the homes by December 29, 2014. When no repairs were made to the homes, the structures were presented to City Council on March 9, 2015. The owners were giving until May 9th to repair or demolish the struc- tures. The owner has obtained Demolition Permits for the mobile homes.  110 Rustic Lane—This building was condemned by City Staff and the dangerous building process has begun. The home was boarded and a lien search has been requested.  222 W. Reed St—City Staff brought forward this property to City Council on May 26, 2015, and requested that the structure be demolished. The owner requested additional time to make repairs and City Council gave the owner until August 26, 2015, to make the repairs.  Vacant Buildings—During the month of May, seventeen (17) additional buildings were registered as vacant, and $16,700.00 in vacant building registration fees were collected.

Code Enforcement Activity—MAY Case Type # cases current # cases % staff ini ated % staff ini ated month YTD current month YTD No valid Rental Permit 30 126 100% 96% No valid Building Permit 3 17 80% 76% Tall grass and weeds 195 273 80% 82% Unregistered vehicle 4 16 75% 88% Abandoned vehicle 5 48 80% 81% Annual Housing Inspec on 6 175 83% 90% Property Maintenance – 48 259 63% 58% Exterior Electric Termina on 19 75 5% 40% Dover Code of Ordinances 81 265 63% 74% Zoning 6 25 33% 48% Total Cases 397 1279 Total # of Inspec ons For 411 Month

Fire Marshal’s Office, Building Inspections & Licensing Summary LIFE SAFETY July14‐May15 May 2014 July13‐May14 Inspec ons MAY 15 FYTD 15 MAY 14 FYTD 14 Annual Fire/Life Safety Inspec ons 35 403 15 162 Fire/Code/DCO Complaints 30 478 67 168 Inspec on Deficiencies from AFI 73 983 35 261 C/O & Acceptance Tests 27 118 0 15 Administra ve Walk Thru 19 106 ‐ ‐ Plan Review 9 ‐ ‐ ‐ Accidental $16,100 $421,000 $0.00 $1,127,000 Incendiary $0 $73,600 $100,000 $100.00 Undetermined $0 $22,900 $45,000 $65,000 PERMITTING AND LICENSING Permits Issued MAY 15 FYTD 15 MAY 14 FYTD 14 Administra ve Permit 7 25 5 10 Building Addi on/Renova on Permits 31 379 34 135 Building Permits 31 184 20 63 Demoli on Permits 4 47 9 22 Fence Permits 15 85 20 37 Fire Preven on Permits 13 90 7 29 Mechanical Permits 30 274 21 134 Plumbing Permits 32 259 18 111 Sign Permits 32 233 29 93 Swimming Pool Permits 0 9 4 5 Business Licenses 84 1066 103 114 Merchant Licenses 2 208 3 15 Contractor Licenses 30 654 36 156 Lodging House Licenses 0 55 0 44 Mobile Homes 5 303 3 23 Public Occupancy 6 399 16 310 Rental Dwelling 69 3521 35 2862 BUILDING INSPECTIONS Inspec ons MAY 15 FYTD 15 MAY 14 FYTD 14 Building 367 3522 269 3,140 Plumbing/Mechanical 325 3082 310 3,255 Cer ficate of Occupancy 17 152 10 91

Fire Marshal’s Office—At a Glance Fire Marshal Timothy Mullaney attended the Delaware State Police Academy where he suc- cessfully completed the three day “Advanced Interview & Interrogation Techniques” course offered by the Delaware State Police for con- tinued education requirements as defined by the Council on Police Training. Recreation Division Enrollment Summary May 2014 verses May 2015 500 400 300 FY14 200 FY15 100 0 General Recreation S ports Trips Leagues Camps Category FY14 FY15 General Recrea on 205 166 Sports 98 63 Trips 43 0 Leagues 361 423 Camps 0 0

Revenue Breakdown: May 2015 verses May 2014 General Recreation General Recreation Sports Sports Trips Trips Leagues Leagues Building & Field Rentals Building & Field Rentals Camps Camps Camp Small Wonder Camp Small Wonder General Recreation $2,668.63 General Recreation $2,623.00 Sports $360.00 Sports $1,225.00 Trips $0.00 Trips $375.00 Leagues $17,260.00 Leagues $12,919.23 Building & Field Rentals $1,125.00 Building & Field Rentals $1,565.00 Camps $1,135.00 Camps $1,920.00 Camp Small Wonder $13,040.00 Camp Small Wonder $9,811.65

John W. Pitts Recreation Center – MAY 2015 Total Program Attendance Facility Usage By The Hour 20,000 1,000 15,000 800 600 10,000 400 5,000 200 0 May 14 0 May 14 June 14 July 14 June 14 July 14 Aug 14 Aug 14 Sept 14 Oct 14 Sept 14 Oct 14 Nov 14 Dec 14 Nov 14 Dec 14 Jan 15 Jan 15 Feb 15 Mar 15 Feb 15 Mar 15 Apr 15 May 15 Apr 15 May 15 Facility Usage By The Hour MAY 15 FYTD 15 MAY 14 FYTD 14 Open Gym 480 4,389.5 533.5 4,707 Fitness Classes 28 424 41.5 576.5 Leagues 32 862.5 30 840 Camps 0 764 0 587.5 Sports Classes 9 245 10.5 214.25 Meetings & Rentals 15.5 364 16 292.5 Enrichment Classes 2 14 6 68.5 Total Facility Usage Hours 566.5 7,063 637.5 7,389.75 Daily Program Attendance** MAY 15 FYTD 15 MAY 14 FYTD 14 Total 1,449 53,349 1,286 47,150 Open Gym 449 5,758 386 4,961 Fitness Classes 262 2,958 275 3,660 Leagues 550 32,458 350 27,627 Camps 0 1,185 0 1,438 Sports Classes 87 2,339 126 2,239 Meetings & Rentals 91 8,596 144 7,064 Enrichment Classes 10 55 5 161 Since our opening in late April 2008, we have had 383,816 guests at the John W. Pitts Recreation Center. May Open Gym Registrations and Packages Sold Packages Sold: MAY MTD YTD FYTD Daily: 16 $48 335 $1,005 Individual Quarterly: 1 $15 14 $210 Individual Annual: 0 $0 4 $120 Family Quarterly: 0 $0 3 $75 Family Annual: 0 $0_ 0 __ $0__ Revenue: $63 $1,410

CITY OF DOVER FINANCE AND PROCUREMENT & INVENTORY DEPARTMENTS MAY 2015 - MONTHLY BUDGET REPORTS PLEASE NOTE – THIS REPORT PROVIDES TOP LINE INFORMATION ON THE OPERATING FUNDS. IF YOU WOULD LIKE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, PLEASE FEEL FREE TO CONTACT THE FINANCE DEPARTMENT.

CITY OF DOVER ACTIVITY REPORTS MAY 2015 FINANCE DEPARTMENT ACTIVITY LEVELS FY14 YTD FY15 YTD BANK TRENDS Number of Deposits Made (Hand, ACH & Wire, Lockbox) 5,940 6,442 Total Amount of All Deposits $ 118,632,306 $ 124,809,340 PAYROLL Hours % Amount Hours % Amount Gross wages per registers 790,154 100.0% $ 18,399,822 798,918 100.0% $ 18,970,835 Wages and Hours Worked Regular 659,349 83.4% $ 14,196,273 655,348 82.0% $ 14,528,571 All over time 33,469 4.2% $ 1,328,588 31,170 3.9% $ 1,264,645 Other Paid or Unpaid Wages and Hours Vacation 39,939 5.1% $ 1,033,029 40,480 5.1% $ 1,080,710 Sick 17,014 2.2% $ 422,402 17,290 2.2% $ 437,294 Terminal Leave - Retiree Vacation/Sick Payout 15,325 1.9% $ 520,493 20,920 2.6% $ 675,888 Comp Time 8,671 1.1% $ 242,194 8,281 1.0% $ 239,578 Personal 1,485 0.2% $ 42,161 1,809 0.2% $ 54,560 Leave Without Pay 3,913 0.5% $ - 3,281 0.4% $ - Other (description below) 10,990 1.4% $ 614,648 20,351 2.5% $ 689,588 Other includes: pay adjustments, military differential pay, training, committee meetings, worker compensation tracking/adjustments, etc. Other Activity Number of Pay Periods 24 24 Number of Payroll Checks & Direct Deposits Issued 8,653 8,850 Number of Pension Checks Issued 2,816 2,786 Total Pension Benefits Paid - Defined Benefit Plan $ 4,745,291 $ 4,779,076 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE Number of Check Vouchers 5,368 5,395 Number of EFT Vouchers 2,188 2,214 Vouchers Dollar Amount Disbursed $ 75,296,937 $ 74,617,869 PROCUREMENT & INVENTORY ACTIVITY LEVELS Contingency & Warehouse Stock $2,800,000 $2,700,000 $2,600,000 Total Dollar Value $2,500,000 $2,400,000 $2,300,000 $2,200,000 $2,100,000 $2,000,000 Series2 Series3 Value: $2,688,902 Line Items: 1,432 Fuel Use Unleaded: 10,981.5 gallons Diesel: 5,934.9 gallons Total Cost: $ 35,104

City of Dover Finance Department Monthly Report – May 2015 General Fund Summary Revised 92% Budget Budget YTD Balance Budget Beginning Balance $ 3,393,000 $ 4,361,500 $ - $ 4,361,500 0.0% Revenues Court of Chancery Fees 1,023,000 1,023,000 925,380 97,620 90.5% Fines & Police Revenues 1,288,800 1,288,800 849,115 439,685 65.9% Franchise Fees 636,000 636,000 512,136 123,864 80.5% Grants 623,500 623,500 530,504 92,996 85.1% Intrafund Services 4,863,000 4,959,300 4,363,377 595,923 88.0% Library & Recreation Revenues 670,400 710,400 600,558 109,842 84.5% Licenses & Permits 2,814,200 2,814,200 2,845,242 (31,042) 101.1% Property Taxes (Includes BID Revenue) (1) 11,099,200 11,099,200 11,146,842 (47,642) 100.4% Miscellaneous Revenues 93,900 93,900 64,394 29,506 68.6% Sanitation Revenues 2,595,600 2,595,600 2,363,714 231,886 91.1% Other Miscellaneous Revenues Garrison Farm Rent Revenue 101,400 101,400 92,294 9,106 91.0% Transfers-In from Special Funds & Utilities Municipal Street Aid Fund 663,900 664,200 664,517 (317) 100.0% 2014 Revenue Bond Proceeds - - 475,000 (475,000) 0.0% Civil Traffic Penalties 500,000 500,000 389,559 110,441 77.9% Transfer Taxes 1,250,000 1,250,000 1,641,364 (391,364) 131.3% Verizon, Contingency and CI Reserves 4,000 54,000 50,000 4,000 92.6% Police Grants 124,000 124,000 88,756 35,244 71.6% Water/Wastewater Fund 500,000 500,000 500,000 - 100.0% Electric Fund 10,000,000 10,000,000 8,920,000 1,080,000 89.2% Total Revenues 38,850,900 39,037,500 37,022,752 2,014,748 94.8% Total Beginning Balance & Revenues $ 42,243,900 $ 43,399,000 $ 37,022,752 $ 6,376,248 85.3% Expenditures City Clerk & Council $ 489,800 $ 493,300 $ 417,121 $ 76,179 84.6% Mayor, City Manager & Human Resources 1,047,100 1,056,300 877,606 178,694 83.1% Police & Police Extra Duty 14,698,600 15,051,400 13,514,758 1,536,642 89.8% Public Services 4,551,700 4,550,000 3,792,895 757,105 83.4% Engineering 192,600 193,700 25,504 168,196 13.2% Procurement & Inventory, Facilities Mgmt., Vehicle Maint. 1,990,100 2,032,900 1,810,743 222,157 89.1% Planning & Inspections 2,192,400 2,241,900 1,932,111 309,789 86.2% Finance, Info Tech & Customer Services 2,716,100 2,751,200 2,427,013 324,187 88.2% Library & Recreation 2,099,500 2,132,800 1,824,910 307,890 85.6% Fire Department 716,100 716,100 643,998 72,102 89.9% Assessor 309,500 319,100 282,783 36,317 88.6% Contribution to DDP 70,000 70,000 70,000 - 100.0% Miscellaneous Grant Expense 25,000 25,000 - 25,000 0.0% Other Employment Expenses 500,000 74,900 - 74,900 0.0% Insurance 724,800 724,800 675,011 49,789 93.1% OPEB - Retiree’s Health Care Contribution 1,636,500 1,636,500 1,497,083 139,417 91.5% Police Pension Trust Contribution - State Grant 500,000 500,000 426,510 73,490 85.3% Appropriation to Employee Pension Fund - Unfunded Liability - 543,000 362,000 181,000 66.7% Appropriation to Police Pension Fund 655,000 755,000 680,500 74,500 90.1% Street Lights 774,500 774,500 711,945 62,555 91.9% Debt Service 708,600 708,600 944,261 (235,661) 133.3% Transfers Out Contingency - 300,000 300,000 - 100.0% Capital Asset Reserve - 60,000 60,000 - 100.0% Parkland Reserve - 25,000 25,000 - 100.0% Uncollectible Reserve 50,000 50,000 50,000 - 100.0% Capital Projects Fund 2,196,000 2,196,000 2,196,000 - 100.0% Total Expenditures 38,843,900 39,982,000 35,547,752 4,434,248 88.9% Budget Balance - Working Capital 3,400,000 3,417,000 - 3,417,000 0.0% Total Budget Balance & Expenditures $ 42,243,900 $ 43,399,000 $ 35,547,752 $ 7,851,248 81.9% Reserve Balances Contingency $ 467,900 $ 719,200 $ 719,728 (1) Property Taxes are the taxes billed and not cash received. The outstanding receivable balance as of 5/31/15 is $205,226 as compared to $220,926 in May 2014.

City of Dover Finance Department Monthly Report – May 2015 Water/Wastewater Fund Summary Revised 92% Budget Budget YTD Balance Budget Beginning Balance - Water $ 658,400 $ 763,600 $ - $ 763,600 0.0% Beginning Balance - Wastewater (98,500) 87,500 - 87,500 0.0% Beginning Balance - Kent County Treatment 155,000 453,400 - 453,400 0.0% 714,900 1,304,500 - 1,304,500 0.0% Revenues Water Fees 4,616,400 4,616,400 4,358,204 258,196 94.4% Wastewater Fees 3,706,800 3,706,800 3,392,316 314,484 91.5% Kent County Treatment Fees 2,902,600 2,902,600 2,680,960 221,640 92.4% Ground Water Inflow Adjustment 1,862,500 1,862,500 1,657,711 204,789 89.0% Water Tank Leases 331,900 331,900 306,693 25,207 92.4% Miscellaneous Service Fee 179,600 179,600 56,746 122,854 31.6% Impact Fees - Water 472,700 427,900 292,967 134,933 68.5% Impact Fees - Wastewater 427,900 472,700 261,515 211,185 55.3% Total Revenues 14,500,400 14,500,400 13,007,112 1,493,288 89.7% Total Beginning Balance & Revenues $ 15,215,300 $ 15,804,900 $ 13,007,112 $ 2,797,788 82.3% Expenses Water/Wastewater Operating Divisions Engineering & Inspection $ 500,900 $ 502,400 $ 418,695 $ 83,705 83.3% Water 485,300 488,600 353,293 135,307 72.3% Water Treatment Plant 1,576,900 1,582,200 1,294,607 287,593 81.8% Wastewater 974,100 975,400 718,206 257,194 73.6% Construction 252,500 253,300 235,118 18,182 92.8% Kent County Treatment 3,655,000 3,655,000 3,689,104 (34,104) 100.9% Intrafund Service Fees 1,354,900 1,371,100 1,211,795 159,305 88.4% OPEB - Retiree's Health Care Contributions 200,000 200,000 175,000 25,000 87.5% Debt Service 1,152,000 1,152,000 1,094,166 57,834 95.0% Other Employment Expenses 17,700 5,500 - 5,500 0.0% Transfers Out General Fund 500,000 500,000 500,000 - 100.0% Water I & E Fund 1,200,000 1,200,000 900,000 300,000 75.0% Wastewater I & E Fund 1,800,000 1,800,000 1,350,000 450,000 75.0% Total Expenses 13,669,300 13,685,500 11,939,984 1,745,516 87.2% Budget Balances Budget Balance - Working Capital - Water 1,020,100 1,113,300 - 1,113,300 0.0% Budget Balance - Working Capital - WW (739,200) (557,400) - (557,400) 0.0% Budget Balance-Working Capital - KSA 1,265,100 1,563,500 - 1,563,500 0.0% Total Budget Balances 1,546,000 2,119,400 - 2,119,400 0.0% Total Budget Balances & Expenses $ 15,215,300 $ 15,804,900 $ 11,939,984 $ 3,864,916 75.5% Reserve Balances Contingency-Water $ 107,700 $ 106,500 $ 108,254 Contingency-Wastewater $ 194,800 $ 192,700 $ 190,049 Impact Fee Reserve - Sewer $ 1,552,300 $ 1,508,700 $ 1,466,140 Impact Fee Reserve - Water $ 203,900 $ 203,600 $ 200,869 Bond Coverage Ratio (Covenant 1.20) 4.29 4.29 4.21

City of Dover Finance Department Monthly Report – May 2015 Electric Revenue Fund Summary Revised 92% Budget Budget YTD Balance Budget Beginning Balance $ 9,253,600 $ 6,603,800 $ - $ 6,603,800 0.0% Revenues Sales to Customers 78,043,000 78,043,000 70,325,596 7,717,404 90.1% Utility Tax 1,296,900 1,296,900 1,154,185 142,715 89.0% Weyandt Hall Rents 200,000 200,000 210,851 (10,851) 105.4% Miscellaneous Revenues 754,600 754,600 1,027,499 (272,899) 136.2% Interest Earned 12,000 12,000 3,295 8,705 27.5% Transfer from Rate Stabilization 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 - 100.0% Total Revenues 82,306,500 82,306,500 74,721,426 7,585,074 90.8% Total Beginning Balance & Revenues $ 91,560,100 $ 88,910,300 $ 74,721,426 $ 14,188,874 84.0% Expenses Power Supply & Generation Hedged Energy $ 21,823,000 $ 21,823,000 $ 24,211,183 $ (2,388,183) 110.9% Power Supply Management 996,000 996,000 913,000 83,000 91.7% Capacity Charges 9,958,900 9,958,900 8,755,928 1,202,972 87.9% Dover Sun Park Energy 2,067,600 2,067,600 1,483,415 584,185 71.7% Solar Renewal Energy Credits 378,600 378,600 286,093 92,507 75.6% PJM Charges - Energy 11,499,800 11,499,800 8,166,141 3,333,659 71.0% PJM Charges - Transmission & Fees 7,234,100 7,234,100 4,794,003 2,440,097 66.3% Total Power Supply 53,958,000 53,958,000 48,609,763 5,348,237 90.1% Plant Operations 6,141,100 6,141,100 5,036,829 1,104,271 82.0% Generation Fuels 1,611,100 1,611,100 1,726,539 (115,439) 107.2% Capacity Credits (8,881,500) (8,881,500) (7,740,731) (1,140,769) 87.2% PJM Spot Market Energy (2,232,800) (2,232,800) (2,388,055) 155,255 107.0% PJM Credits (486,700) (486,700) (502,828) 16,128 103.3% Total Generation (3,848,800) (3,848,800) (3,868,246) 19,446 100.5% Total Power Supply & Plant 50,109,200 50,109,200 44,741,517 5,367,683 89.3% Electric Operating Divisions: Transmission/Distribution 4,028,700 3,954,900 3,204,243 750,657 81.0% Electrical Engineering 1,370,900 1,379,300 1,052,593 326,707 76.3% Administration 636,600 632,400 543,774 88,626 86.0% Meter Reading 267,600 357,200 337,446 19,754 94.5% Systems Operations 686,300 696,500 636,693 59,807 91.4% Intrafund Services 3,508,100 3,588,200 3,151,582 436,618 87.8% Utility Tax 1,296,900 1,296,900 1,154,185 142,715 89.0% OPEB Trust Contribution - Unfunded Liability 1,009,800 1,009,800 883,575 126,225 87.5% OPEB - Retirees Health Care Contribution 513,300 513,300 449,138 64,162 87.5% Interest on Deposits 20,000 20,000 16,812 3,188 84.1% Green Energy Payment to DEMEC 130,000 130,000 117,015 12,985 90.0% Accounts Receivable Write-Offs 200,000 200,000 200,000 - 100.0% Other Employee Expenses 54,200 24,000 - 24,000 0.0% Contractual Services RFP's 246,800 246,800 225,740 21,060 91.5% Debt Service 3,297,000 3,297,000 3,121,706 175,294 94.7% Transfers Out: General Fund 10,000,000 10,000,000 8,920,000 1,080,000 89.2% Electric Improvement & Extension Fund 4,750,000 4,750,000 2,975,000 1,775,000 62.6% Inventory Reserve 175,000 175,000 175,000 - 100.0% Total Expenses 82,300,400 82,380,500 71,906,019 10,474,481 87.3% Budget Balance - Working Capital 9,259,700 6,529,800 - 6,529,800 0.0% Total Budget Balance & Expenses $ 91,560,100 $ 88,910,300 $ 71,906,019 $ 17,004,281 80.9% Reserve Balances Contingency Reserve $ 826,000 $ 825,000 $ 821,986 Insurance Reserve $ 743,600 $ 742,800 $ 740,019 Rate Stabilization Reserve $ 8,583,000 $ 8,541,500 $ 8,498,822 Bond Coverage Ratio (Covenant 1.25) 1.95 1.93 2.32 Megawatt Hours Sold & Purchased Sales to Customers MWh (excluding Street Light MWh) 712,390 712,390 650,575 91.3% Sales per MWh $ 109.55 $ 109.55 $ 108.10 98.7% Purchased/Generated MWh 741,522 741,522 685,762 92.5% All In MWh Supply & Generation $ 67.58 $ 67.58 $ 65.24 96.5%

City of Dover Finance Department Monthly Report – May 2015 General Capital Project Fund Summary Revised 92% Budget Budget YTD Balance Budget Beginning Balance - Projects $ 117,100 $ 2,324,100 $ - $ 2,324,100 0.0% Beginning Balance - Library $ - $ 330,500 $ - $ 330,500 0.0% Revenues State Grant - Other 153,000 208,000 17,913 190,087 8.6% Interest Earnings - - 1,592 (1,592) 0.0% Transfer from General Fund for Projects 2,196,000 2,196,000 2,196,000 - 100.0% 2014 Loan Proceeds - PD/Fire/Streets 3,579,400 3,593,300 3,660,000 (66,700) 101.9% Income from Sale of Assets - - 79,508 (79,508) 0.0% Transfer from Parkland Reserve - 104,000 104,000 - 100.0% Total Revenues 5,928,400 6,101,300 6,059,013 42,287 99.3% Total Beginning Balance & Revenue $ 6,045,500 $ 8,755,900 $ 6,059,013 $ 2,696,887 69.2% Expenditures Fire $ 827,300 $ 827,300 $ 526,617 $ 300,683 63.7% Grounds Maintenance 68,100 86,700 65,947 20,753 76.1% Recreation 146,000 284,400 207,323 77,077 72.9% Police 499,100 601,700 539,978 61,722 89.7% Streets 3,956,400 5,917,900 2,574,090 3,343,810 43.5% Sanitation 256,500 256,500 - 256,500 0.0% Procurement & Inventory - 55,000 49,672 5,328 90.3% Loan Issuance Costs 75,000 61,100 60,668 432 99.3% Transfer to Capital Asset Reserve - 330,500 330,500 - 100.0% Transfer to Parkland Reserve 100,000 180,000 180,000 - 100.0% Total Expenditures 5,928,400 8,601,100 4,534,795 4,066,305 52.7% Budget Balance - Projects 117,100 154,800 - 154,800 0.0% Total Budget Balance & Expenditures $ 6,045,500 $ 8,755,900 $ 4,534,795 $ 4,221,105 51.8% Reserve Balances Capital Asset Replacement Reserve $ 512,300 $ 914,000 $ 914,369 Parkland/Recreation $ 304,800 $ 320,700 $ 320,527

City of Dover Finance Department Monthly Report – May 2015 Water/Wastewater Improvement & Extension Fund Summary Revised 92% Budget Budget YTD Balance Budget Beginning Balance - Water $ 1,021,200 $ 7,588,800 $ - $ 7,588,800 0.0% Beginning Balance - Wastewater $ 1,060,000 $ 5,500,400 $ - $ 5,500,400 0.0% Revenues Income from Sale of Assets - - 20,336 (20,336) 0.0% Grants Revenue - - 22,366 (22,366) 0.0% Interest Earned 25,000 40,000 35,191 4,809 88.0% Transfer from Operating Fund for Water 1,200,000 1,200,000 900,000 300,000 75.0% Transfer from Operating Fund for Wastewater 1,800,000 1,800,000 1,350,000 450,000 75.0% Transfer from Impact Fee Reserve - Wastewater 1,315,600 1,315,600 1,315,600 - 100.0% Total Revenues 4,340,600 4,355,600 3,643,493 712,107 83.7% Total Beginning Balance & Revenues $ 6,421,800 $ 17,444,800 $ 3,643,493 $ 13,801,307 20.9% Expenses Water $ 1,336,900 $ 7,526,500 $ 2,195,742 $ 5,330,758 29.2% Wastewater 3,273,200 7,785,600 3,107,656 4,677,944 39.9% Water Treatment Plant 38,100 38,100 33,771 4,329 88.6% Total Expenses 4,648,200 15,350,200 5,337,169 10,013,031 34.8% Budget Balance - Working Capital - Water 858,700 1,244,200 - 1,244,200 0.0% Budget Balance - Working Capital - Wastewater 914,900 850,400 - 850,400 0.0% Total Budget Balances 1,773,600 2,094,600 - 2,094,600 0.0% Total Budget Balances & Expenses $ 6,421,800 $ 17,444,800 $ 5,337,169 $ 12,107,631 30.6% Reserve Balances Capital Asset Replacement - Water $ 522,700 $ 522,500 $ 515,537 Capital Asset Replacement - Wastewater $ 521,600 $ 519,100 $ 512,188

City of Dover Finance Department Monthly Report – May 2015 Electric Improvement & Extension Fund Summary Revised 92% Budget Budget YTD Balance Budget Beginning Balance $ 3,362,200 $ 5,942,500 $ - $ 5,942,500 0.0% Revenues Interest Earnings 24,800 24,800 654 24,146 2.6% Transfer from Electric Revenue Fund 4,750,000 4,750,000 2,975,000 1,775,000 62.6% Income from Sale of Assets - - 40,292 (40,292) 0.0% General Service Billing 250,000 250,000 95,045 154,955 38.0% Total Revenues 5,024,800 5,024,800 3,110,991 1,913,809 61.9% Total Beginning Balance & Revenues $ 8,387,000 $ 10,967,300 $ 3,110,991 $ 7,856,309 28.4% Expenses Electric Generation $ 2,240,000 $ 2,739,300 $ 1,662,470 $ 1,076,830 60.7% Transmission/Distribution 1,033,000 2,008,300 885,292 1,123,008 44.1% Electrical Engineering 1,663,100 2,596,100 618,212 1,977,888 23.8% Total Expenses 4,936,100 7,343,700 3,165,974 4,177,726 43.1% Budget Balance - Working Capital (Unaudited) 3,450,900 3,623,600 - 3,623,600 0.0% Total Budget Balance & Expenses $ 8,387,000 $ 10,967,300 $ 3,165,974 $ 7,801,326 28.9% Reserve Balances Depreciation Reserve $ 9,998,200 $ 10,015,300 $ 9,949,504 Future Capacity Reserve $ 10,148,700 $ 10,136,900 $ 10,099,403 City of Dover Finance Department Monthly Report – May 2015 Community Transportation Improvement Fund Revised 92% Budget Budget YTD Balance Budget Beginning Balance $ 78,900 $ 143,500 $ - $ 143,500 0.0% Revenues Grants Revenue 500,000 1,677,800 29,499 1,648,301 1.8% Interest Earned 500 500 232 268 46.4% Total Revenues 500,500 1,678,300 29,731 1,648,569 1.8% Total Beginning Balance & Revenues $ 579,400 $ 1,821,800 $ 29,731 $ 1,792,069 1.6% Expenses Program Expenses - Del Dot $ 500,000 $ 1,677,800 $ 71,971 $ 1,605,829 4.3% Total Expenses 500,000 1,677,800 71,971 1,605,829 4.3% Budget Balance - Working Capital 79,400 144,000 - 144,000 0.0% Total Budget Balances & Expenses $ 579,400 $ 1,821,800 $ 71,971 $ 1,749,829 4.0%

City of Dover Finance Department Monthly Report – May 2015 Police Grant Funds Revised 92% Budget Budget YTD Balance Budget Beginning Balance $ 77,200 $ 172,100 $ - $ 172,100 0.0% Revenues Grants Received 339,000 436,400 272,871 163,529 62.5% Interest Earned - - 749 (749) 0.0% Total Revenues 339,000 436,400 273,620 162,780 62.7% Total Beginning Balance & Revenues $ 416,200 $ 608,500 $ 273,620 $ 334,880 45.0% Expenses Cadet Program $ - $ 17,900 $ 6,422 $ 11,478 35.9% Program Expenses/Supplies 156,000 317,900 104,459 213,441 32.9% Computer Hardware 50,000 47,800 10,793 37,007 22.6% Telephone/Fax 15,000 15,000 12,935 2,065 86.2% Training/Conference/Food/Travel 32,000 45,000 12,166 32,834 27.0% Consulting/Audit Fees 1,000 1,000 737 263 73.7% Contractual services 6,000 10,200 5,839 4,361 57.2% Operating Transfers - Out 124,000 124,000 88,756 35,244 71.6% Total Expenses 384,000 578,800 242,107 336,693 41.8% Budget Balance - Working Capital (Unaudited) 32,200 29,700 - 29,700 0.0% Total Budget Balances & Expenses $ 416,200 $ 608,500 $ 242,107 $ 366,393 39.8%

City of Dover Finance Department Monthly Report – May 2015 Library Grant Fund Revised 92% Budget Budget YTD Balance Budget Beginning Balance $ 17,300 $ 44,800 $ - $ 44,800 0.0% Revenues Grants Received 274,100 281,400 281,313 87 100.0% Total Revenues 274,100 281,400 281,313 87 100.0% Total Beginning Balance & Revenues $ 291,400 $ 326,200 $ 281,313 $ 44,887 86.2% Expenses Program Expenses/Supplies-State Grants $ 28,000 $ 29,900 $ 26,710 $ 3,190 89.3% Program Expenses/Supplies-Federal Grants - 2,500 2,500 - 100.0% Office Supplies 24,000 28,000 21,881 6,119 78.1% Printing/Duplicating 8,900 14,000 8,776 5,224 62.7% Postage 100 100 36 64 36.0% Books 128,900 132,600 102,416 30,184 77.2% Furniture 2,000 15,100 6,748 8,352 44.7% Audio Visual Supplies 74,000 75,100 55,720 19,380 74.2% Training/Conference/Food/Travel 3,500 3,500 4,112 (612) 117.5% Computer Hardware - - 1,105 (1,105) 0.0% Contractual Services - 900 - 900 0.0% Office Equipment/Repairs & Maintenance 2,000 6,000 4,913 1,087 81.9% Other Equipment - Purchases 2,700 1,200 1,321 (121) 110.1% Total Expenses 274,100 308,900 236,238 72,662 76.5% Budget Balance - Working Capital 17,300 17,300 - 17,300 0.0% Total Budget Balances & Expenses $ 291,400 $ 326,200 $ 236,238 $ 89,962 72.4% City of Dover Finance Department Monthly Report – May 2015 CJC Grants/Aid Revised 92% Budget Budget YTD Balance Budget Beginning Balance $ - $ - $ - $ - 0.0% Revenues Grants Received 31,800 31,800 10,549 21,251 33.2% Total Revenues 31,800 31,800 10,549 21,251 33.2% Total Beginning Balance & Revenues $ 31,800 $ 31,800 $ 10,549 $ 21,251 33.2% Expenses Contractual Services $ 31,800 $ 31,800 $ 10,549 $ 21,251 33.2% Total Expenses 31,800 31,800 10,549 21,251 33.2% Budget Balance - Working Capital (Unaudited) - - - - 0.0% Total Budget Balances & Expenses $ 31,800 $ 31,800 $ 10,549 $ 21,251 33.2%

City of Dover Finance Department Monthly Report – May 2015 After School Program/Substance Abuse Prevention Fund Revised 92% Budget Budget YTD Balance Budget Beginning Balance $ 41,000 $ 41,000 $ - $ 41,000 0.0% Revenues Grants Received 55,600 55,600 28,030 27,570 50.4% Recreation Revenue 33,000 33,000 40,144 (7,144) 121.6% Total Revenues 88,600 88,600 68,174 20,426 76.9% Total Beginning Balance & Revenues $ 129,600 $ 129,600 $ 68,174 $ 61,426 52.6% Expenses Temporary Help/Benefits $ 54,000 $ 54,000 $ 32,916 $ 21,084 61.0% Program Expenses/Supplies 55,600 55,600 26,375 29,225 47.4% Total Expenses 109,600 109,600 59,291 50,309 54.1% Budget Balance - Working Capital (Unaudited) 20,000 20,000 - 20,000 0.0% Total Budget Balances & Expenses $ 129,600 $ 129,600 $ 59,291 $ 70,309 45.7% City of Dover Finance Department Monthly Report – May 2015 CDBG Fund Revised 92% Budget Budget YTD Balance Budget Beginning Balance $ - $ 2,100 $ - $ 2,100 0.0% Revenues Grants Received 235,000 284,200 189,579 94,621 66.7% Interest Earnings - - 97 (97) 0.0% Total Revenues 235,000 284,200 189,676 94,524 66.7% Total Beginning Balance & Revenues $ 235,000 $ 286,300 $ 189,676 $ 96,624 66.3% Expenses Closing Cost/Down Payment Program $ 102,800 $ 103,000 $ 102,068 $ 932 99.1% Dover Interfaith Ministry 27,500 27,500 27,500 - 100.0% MHDC Emergency Home Repair - 100 28 72 28.0% First State RC&D - 1,900 1,853 47 97.5% Elizabeth W Murphy School 50,000 51,200 51,135 65 99.9% NCALL Research Inc. 7,700 10,000 3,500 6,500 35.0% Milford Housing H/O Rehabilitation - 3,000 2,933 67 97.8% Salaries 47,000 87,500 33,872 53,628 38.7% NSP Expense - - 674 (674) 0.0% Total Expenses 235,000 284,200 223,563 60,637 78.7% Budget Balance - Working Capital - 2,100 - 2,100 0.0% Total Budget Balances & Expenses $ 235,000 $ 286,300 $ 223,563 $ 62,737 78.1%

Monthly Report May 2015 Economic Development Office

2015_05  Bi-weekly conference calls with Garrison Energy Center  Meeting with Mayor Christiansen to discuss Delaware State Quality Program possibilities  Attended DDP Parking Committee Meeting  Garrison Oak Technology Park Construction Progress Meeting with Project Manager and owner of ADEL to discuss solid timeline for infrastructure completion to Uzin Utz  Attended Greater Kent Committee Meeting  Discussed power plant noise at Garrison Oak with multiple homeowners and provided contact information to Calpine representatives  Discussed Airbase Carpet Mart empty building with Rose Urban and potential use for building  Meeting with City Manager and Philipp Utz to discuss firm timeline for infrastructure completion  Economic Development Overview Presentation to Leadership Central Delaware  Met with Alan Levin  Attended Mayor’s Annual Reception  Visited all Downtown merchants with Beverly Jackson to alert them to video release  Attended DEED meeting  Attended Economic Roundtable and gave Economic Development Overview of GOTP and city- wide projects  Attended Central Delaware Chamber of Commerce Board meeting  Attended Dover LEADS Group Meeting  Met with Justin White to discuss food trailer  Meeting with Amy Mullen to discuss Farmers Market progress  Attended Governors Prayer Breakfast  Attended ribbon-cutting at Leslie’s Pool Supplies  Attended Economic Consortium meeting  Gave tour of GOTP to professors from Delaware State University and representatives of the USDA  Attended Bayhealth Business and Investment Committee Meeting  Chaired DDP Economic Development Committee Meeting  Met with Mike Harrington to discuss utilization of parking lot  Attended Kent County Plant Managers Meeting  Attended Restoring Central Dover Steering Committee Meeting  Attended Kent County Tourism Board Meeting  Teleconference with Steve Solecki from Produce Junction to discuss his needs and timeline for completion of renovations  Walk Around of Downtown Dover with Downtown merchants, City Manager, City Planner and Mayor  Meeting with Tom Ross to discuss Data Center update, followed by tour of GOTP and updated progress

 Met with Paula Casey to discuss business plan for expanding her business after moving into the Priscilla Block Building  Attended teleconference to discuss web design for Downtown Dover Partnership  Attended signage unveiling at The Green with Senator Carper for Delaware’s National Park  Met with Jenny Jewell of Acorn Books to discuss relocation plans for Acorn Books  Provided Advantech internet and fiber optic information at Garrison Oak Technology Park Measures: 1 Maintain an unemployment rate for the City of Dover that is lower than national and state averages 2012-2013 Actual 2013-2014 Actual 2014 - 2015 Actual Results <10% unemployment rate < 10% unemployment rate <10% unemployment rate in June 2013 in June 2014 in July 2015 7.5% - US Rate 6.1 % - US Rate 5.5 % - US Rate 6.9% - DE Rate 6.9 % - DE Rate 4.6 % - DE Rate 8.9% - City of Dover Rate 8.3% - City of Dover Rate 6.9% - City of Dover Rate June 2013 Actual June 2014 Actual May 2015 Actual 2 Monitor number of contacts with small businesses and with out-of-town companies interested in locating in Dover 2012-2013 Actual 2013-2014 Actual 2014 - 2015 Actual Results ≥20 contacts with potential >20 contacts with potential >20 contacts with potential small businesses; small businesses; small businesses; 18 contacts YTD 23 Contacts YTD 16 Contacts YTD ≥11 contacts with out-of- >11 contacts with out-of- >11 contacts with out-of- town companies interested town companies interested town companies interested in locating in Dover in locating in Dover in locating in Dover 7 Contacts YTD 13 Contacts YTD 15 Contacts YTD 2015-05 Downtown Dover Partnership  Provided technical assistance to five (5) prospective small business individuals on overall business development within the Downtown Dover Business District  Continued providing technical assistance to three (3) prospective small business individuals on locating available space within the downtown district to lease  Coordinated and implemented logistics (permits, equipment set-up, etc.) for the First Friday Event held in May

 Coordinated media (newspaper announcements), website and social media press releases of series of Special Events which occurred during May ’15 in downtown Dover  Disseminated to the downtown merchants and network partners information on the ServSafe Certification Training held at DSU – College of Business  Disseminated to the downtown merchants and network partners information on the Retail Realities and Trends Training held at DSU – College of Business  Assisted Merchant Group with coordinating logistics for the Dover Days – History, Heritage and Hops event held downtown  Met with Tina Bradbury to discuss Farmer’s Market program  Met with Eugene Stone from Bike Werx to discuss the DDD Incentives Program  Disseminated to the downtown merchants and network partners information on the Ride of Silence Event  Disseminated to the downtown merchants and network partners information on the Substance Abuse Prevention 2015 Policy Summit  Disseminated to the downtown merchants and network partners information on the US SBA – Federal Contracting Certification Program Seminar  Processed inquiry and feedback from Joyce Enzor regarding redevelopment issues of downtown  Updated DDD Available Property List  Updated Downtown Dover Business Corridor Vacancy List  Posted marketing materials for the Artfest’ 15 Event on Website  Created posters for NCALL – Community Block Party  Met with Barthenia Rochester to discuss plans for the ADA 25 Event  Telephone Conference with Pete Malmberg to discuss vacant property  Assisted Maggie Pleasant – NCALL with logistics for Community Block Party  Met with Joe Parks to discuss and process the Vaughn $500 Vacancy Registration Fee  Met with Sherwanda Rachal to discuss logistics for the Dover Mile and Colonial 5K Event  Disseminated to the downtown merchants and network partners information on the Priority Alert Warning on Verizon Scam  Developed Dover Central Business Building Rental Rate Breakdown and Demographic Report for the John Childress Project  Met with Linda Rolli regarding use of Loockerman Way Plaza  Met with Latricia Thomas and Christine Gordon from A Center for Mental Wellness to discuss available properties downtown  Processed inquiry and downtown feedback from Meredith Convert  Assisted Whitney Towns from Boys & Girls Clubs with Community Rally Event logistics  Met with Lakisha Wingard from CIS to discuss State Farm Grant  Met with Rick Hill to edit Annual Report final Draft  Completed and submitted USDA – RDEG Grant  Arranged logistics for Corey Yanoshak from Lake Forest to conduct annual Student/Business Survey Project

 Telephone Conference with Jane Smart regarding vacant building at 314 W. Loockerman Street  Coordinated information meeting with Jim Purcell from CIS and Mayor Christiansen to discuss old Dover Library building  Met with Sarah MacDonald from CIS to discuss Farmer’s Market Sponsorship  Telephone conference with Martin Hageman regarding Wilmington’s Downtown Vision Survey  Met with Justin White regarding concession trailer in downtown Dover  Attended and participated as a network partner in the monthly Kent County Open for Business  Attended the DDP Marketing & Promotion Committee Meeting  Attended NCALL Restoring Central Dover Steering Committee Meeting  Attended the DDP Parking and Safety Committee Meeting  Attended the DDP Design Committee Meeting  Attended the DDP Economic Development Committee Meeting  Attended the DDP Board of Director’s Meeting  Conducted the Parking Lot Survey Count  Completed first draft of downtown business corridor master database project

Date Range: From 5/1/2015 to 5/31/2015 Incident Run Log Company: All Companies Dover Fire Department Sorted by: Not selected Date FDID Incident# Alarm ### Address Suite Type Lgth 05/01/2015 30046 2015-000442 00:28 48 WILLIS RD False alarm or false call, other 0.4 05/01/2015 30046 2015-000443 10:01 1101 S DUPONT HWY Smoke detector activation, no fire - unintentional 0.5 05/01/2015 30046 2015-000444 11:49 1200 N DUPONT HWY Removal of victim(s) from stalled elevator 0.6 05/01/2015 30046 2015-000445 21:15 411 LEGISLATIVE AVE Smoke scare, odor of smoke 0.3 05/02/2015 30046 2015-000446 10:39 FORREST AVE Gasoline or other flammable liquid spill 0.3 05/02/2015 30046 2015-000447 10:50 E LOOCKERMAN ST Emergency medical service incident, other 0.2 05/02/2015 30046 2015-000448 15:46 127 HOLMES ST Combustible/flammable gas/liquid condition, other 0.5 05/02/2015 30046 2015-000449 18:09 400 S QUEEN ST HazMat release investigation w/no HazMat 0.1 05/02/2015 30046 2015-000450 20:30 46 S GOVERNORS AVE Good intent call, other 0.1 05/03/2015 30046 2015-000451 15:12 1225 WALKER RD System malfunction, other 0.3 05/03/2015 30046 2015-000452 16:08 51 WEBBS LN D Hazardous condition, other 0.6 05/03/2015 30046 2015-000453 16:11 223 S DUPONT HWY Good intent call, other 0.3 05/03/2015 30046 2015-000454 19:03 1197 JANES RD Telephone, malicious false alarm 0.3 05/03/2015 30046 2015-000455 19:54 562 CRAWFORD AVE Good intent call, other 0.3 05/04/2015 30046 2015-000456 08:52 1200 N DUPONT HWY System malfunction, other 0.3 05/04/2015 30046 2015-000457 11:09 200 BEECHWOOD AVE Passenger vehicle fire 1.2 05/04/2015 30046 2015-000458 14:14 1041 N DUPONT HWY Good intent call, other 0.3 05/04/2015 30046 2015-000459 14:51 1200 N DUPONT HWY Smoke scare, odor of smoke 0.4 05/04/2015 30046 2015-000460 17:42 915 S DUPONT HWY Outside rubbish fire, other 0.3 05/04/2015 30046 2015-000461 18:48 295 S DUPONT HWY Animal rescue 0.3 05/04/2015 30046 2015-000462 20:01 1250 W NORTH ST-ACROSS FROM Outside rubbish, trash or waste fire 0.4 05/05/2015 30046 2015-000463 07:54 45 S STATE ST System malfunction, other 0.5 05/05/2015 30046 2015-000464 11:13 KENTWOOD DR Mobile property (vehicle) fire, other 0.5 05/05/2015 30046 2015-000465 19:28 1300 S FARMVIEW DR C Cooking fire, confined to container 0.4 05/05/2015 30046 2015-000466 21:06 1200 N DUPONT HWY Defective elevator, no occupants 0.3 05/06/2015 30046 2015-000467 00:06 255 WEBBS LN C False alarm or false call, other 0.4 05/06/2015 30046 2015-000468 09:59 1570 N DUPONT HWY Cooking fire, confined to container 0.3 05/07/2015 30046 2015-000469 21:27 424 COUNTRY DR Heat from short circuit (wiring), defective/worn 0.6 05/08/2015 30046 2015-000470 12:27 9 HEATHERFIELD WAY Gas leak (natural gas or LPG) 1.6 05/08/2015 30046 2015-000471 17:57 1406 FORREST AVE A-1 Outside rubbish fire, other 0.3 05/08/2015 30046 2015-000472 23:27 213 N BRADFORD ST Detector activation, no fire - unintentional 0.3 05/09/2015 30046 2015-000473 12:11 470 S DUPONT HWY Electrical wiring/equipment problem, other 0.9 05/09/2015 30046 2015-000474 15:08 154 PRESIDENT DR Oil or other combustible liquid spill 0.5 05/10/2015 30046 2015-000475 18:51 500 PERSIMMON TREE LA 5 Smoke detector activation, no fire - unintentional 0.5 05/10/2015 30046 2015-000476 19:26 130 HAMAN DR Smoke or odor removal 0.3 05/11/2015 30046 2015-000477 06:09 N STATE ST & WALKER RD Good intent call, other 0.4 05/11/2015 30046 2015-000478 10:00 725 HORSEPOND RD Service Call, other 0.2 05/11/2015 30046 2015-000479 13:42 834 S GOVERNORS AVE System malfunction, other 0.2 05/12/2015 30046 2015-000480 09:41 213 N BRADFORD ST Unintentional transmission of alarm, other 0.2 05/12/2015 30046 2015-000481 10:04 1800 CHESTNUT GROVE RD Outside equipment fire 0.4 05/12/2015 30046 2015-000482 13:55 510 GREENHILL RD Assist police or other governmental agency 0.4 05/12/2015 30046 2015-000483 15:00 1165 N DUPONT HWY 1 Good intent call, other 0.2 05/12/2015 30046 2015-000484 19:02 124 KENTWOOD DR Fire in mobile home used as fixed residence 0.5 05/12/2015 30046 2015-000485 19:55 1001 WHITEOAK RD BLDG G Cooking fire, confined to container 0.4 05/13/2015 30046 2015-000486 01:40 654 N DUPONT HWY Motor vehicle accident with no injuries. 0.1 05/13/2015 30046 2015-000487 12:28 1200 N DUPONT HWY Electrical wiring/equipment problem, other 0.9 05/13/2015 30046 2015-000488 22:23 HARMONY LANE Assist police or other governmental agency 0.5 05/14/2015 30046 2015-000489 10:30 1294 FORREST AVE Extinguishing system activation due to malfunction 0.6 05/14/2015 30046 2015-000490 19:22 1706 N DUPONT HWY System malfunction, other 0.4 05/15/2015 30046 2015-000491 10:30 150 LAKEVIEW DR Cooking fire, confined to container 0.9 05/15/2015 30046 2015-000492 10:41 101 BABB DR Cooking fire, confined to container 0.6 05/15/2015 30046 2015-000493 11:58 631 RIDGELY ST False alarm or false call, other 0.2 05/15/2015 30046 2015-000494 14:31 460 E WATER ST Assist police or other governmental agency 1.7 05/15/2015 30046 2015-000495 17:15 117 NAULT RD Natural vegetation fire, other 0.4 05/15/2015 30046 2015-000496 17:21 460 E WATER ST Assist police or other governmental agency 0.7 05/15/2015 30046 2015-000497 20:02 S QUEEN ST Brush or brush-and-grass mixture fire 0.4 05/15/2015 30046 2015-000498 20:04 5 DOVER CIR Overheated motor 0.7 05/16/2015 30046 2015-000499 08:34 Scarbrough Road Motor vehicle accident with injuries 0.7 05/16/2015 30046 2015-000500 09:39 462 E WATER ST Smoke or odor removal 0.7 Date: 6/29/2015 Page: 1 Time:8:58 AM

Date FDID Incident# Alarm ### Address Suite Type Lgth 05/16/2015 30046 2015-000501 12:12 400 N DUPONT HWY C System malfunction, other 0.3 05/16/2015 30046 2015-000502 18:41 2005 LEIPSIC RD CO detector activation due to malfunction 0.3 05/16/2015 30046 2015-000503 19:43 1450 N DUPONT HWY 0587 Sprinkler activation due to malfunction 0.4 05/17/2015 30046 2015-000504 18:14 43 WILDBERRY DR Dispatched & canceled en route 0.0 05/17/2015 30046 2015-000505 19:42 1425 N DUPONT HWY Alarm system sounded due to malfunction 0.7 05/17/2015 30046 2015-000506 20:44 413 COURT ST D Good intent call, other 0.3 05/18/2015 30046 2015-000507 12:55 41 LAUREL DR Alarm system activation, no fire - unintentional 0.4 05/18/2015 30046 2015-000508 16:26 235 SIMON CIRCLE Cooking fire, confined to container 0.2 05/18/2015 30046 2015-000509 18:15 100 LEWIS MILL DR Good intent call, other 0.3 05/19/2015 30046 2015-000510 11:09 1200 N DUPONT HWY Unintentional transmission of alarm, other 0.5 05/19/2015 30046 2015-000511 11:41 1289 WALKER RD BUILD A Special type of incident, other 1.4 05/19/2015 30046 2015-000512 12:54 120 N STATE ST Smoke detector activation, no fire - unintentional 0.3 05/19/2015 30046 2015-000513 13:43 1001 FORREST AVE False alarm or false call, other 0.3 05/19/2015 30046 2015-000514 18:47 SR1 & M/M 104 Dispatched & canceled en route 0.1 05/19/2015 30046 2015-000515 20:29 401 Doveview Drive Special type of incident, other 0.3 05/20/2015 30046 2015-000516 12:56 1010 LONG POINT RD Public service 0.5 05/20/2015 30046 2015-000517 16:29 148 THAMES DR 2 Fires in structure other than in a building 0.6 05/20/2015 30046 2015-000518 20:44 305 ALDER RD Cooking fire, confined to container 0.1 05/21/2015 30046 2015-000519 00:05 834 S GOVERNORS AVE Alarm system sounded due to malfunction 0.2 05/21/2015 30046 2015-000520 08:01 3000 LEMAY LA C System malfunction, other 0.6 05/21/2015 30046 2015-000521 18:03 118 N KIRKWOOD ST Smoke scare, odor of smoke 0.3 05/21/2015 30046 2015-000522 19:45 102 S. QUEEN ST. Smoke detector activation, no fire - unintentional 0.3 05/21/2015 30046 2015-000523 21:07 834 S GOVERNORS AVE Alarm system sounded due to malfunction 0.0 05/21/2015 30046 2015-000524 23:13 458 VOSHELLS MILL STAR HILL R Dispatched & canceled en route 0.3 05/21/2015 30046 2015-000525 23:56 834 S GOVERNORS AVE False alarm or false call, other 0.0 05/23/2015 30046 2015-000526 12:17 111 HOLMES ST Brush or brush-and-grass mixture fire 0.5 05/23/2015 30046 2015-000527 15:39 1171 BAY RD False alarm or false call, other 0.3 05/24/2015 30046 2015-000528 21:42 400 N DUPONT HWY D Smoke detector activation due to malfunction 0.3 05/24/2015 30046 2015-000529 23:13 HOLMES ST Trash or rubbish fire, contained 1.0 05/25/2015 30046 2015-000530 12:45 206 TOPAZ CIR Cooking fire, confined to container 0.3 05/25/2015 30046 2015-000531 19:26 88 HIGHVIEW AVE Building fire 1.6 05/26/2015 30046 2015-000532 20:20 436 NORTHDOWN DR Special type of incident, other 0.2 05/27/2015 30046 2015-000533 07:47 1200 N DUPONT HWY Smoke scare, odor of smoke 0.0 05/27/2015 30046 2015-000534 10:01 15 BALTUSROL CT Smoke detector activation due to malfunction 0.2 05/27/2015 30046 2015-000535 12:52 211 DELAWARE AVE Malicious, mischievous false call, other 0.3 05/27/2015 30046 2015-000536 15:06 655 N DUPONT HWY Good intent call, other 0.3 05/27/2015 30046 2015-000537 20:35 834 S GOVERNORS AVE False alarm or false call, other 0.1 05/28/2015 30046 2015-000538 05:59 9 PAR HAVEN DR C System malfunction, other 0.4 05/28/2015 30046 2015-000539 16:17 1131 N DUPONT HWY Hazardous condition, other 2.8 05/29/2015 30046 2015-000540 09:01 787 BACON AVE Cooking fire, confined to container 0.7 05/29/2015 30046 2015-000541 12:43 216 WINTERBERRY DR Arcing, shorted electrical equipment 0.5 05/29/2015 30046 2015-000542 13:01 1 STEELE RD Smoke or odor removal 0.4 05/29/2015 30046 2015-000543 13:37 380 PARADEE DR Smoke detector activation due to malfunction 0.3 05/29/2015 30046 2015-000544 13:55 1572 N DUPONT HWY System malfunction, other 0.8 05/29/2015 30046 2015-000545 15:11 1572 N DUPONT HWY Good intent call, other 0.2 05/29/2015 30046 2015-000546 15:24 1300 S FARMVIEW DR C Cooking fire, confined to container 0.3 05/30/2015 30046 2015-000547 08:27 787 BACON AVE Smoke detector activation due to malfunction 0.4 05/30/2015 30046 2015-000548 20:40 1131 N DUPONT HWY Public service 1.5 05/31/2015 30046 2015-000549 09:15 1083 S BRADFORD ST Electrical wiring/equipment problem, other 0.9 05/31/2015 30046 2015-000550 12:14 1131 N DUPONT HWY Rescue, EMS incident, other 0.4 05/31/2015 30046 2015-000551 15:02 986 WHATCOAT DR False alarm or false call, other 0.3 05/31/2015 30046 2015-000552 15:35 1131 N DUPONT HWY Medical assist, assist EMS crew 0.5 05/31/2015 30046 2015-000553 21:34 51 WEBBS LN A Police matter 1.8 Total Number of Incidents: 112 Total Length of Incidents: 53.2 Hours

Date Range: From 5/1/2015 to 5/31/2015 Incidents by Situation Found Dover Fire Department Situation Found Rescue & Emergency Medica 23 Fire Overpressure Rupture, Exp Hazardous Condition (No F 0 Overpressure Rupture, Exp 6 Rescue & Emergency Medica 12 Hazardous Condition (No F 13 Service Call 18 Good Intent Call Fire 37 False Alarm & False Call 0 Severe Weather & Natural Service Call 3 Special Incident Type 0 Blank Blank Special Incident Type Severe Weather & Natural Good Intent Call False Alarm & False Call Date: 6/29/2015 Page: 1

Date Range: From 5/1/2015 to 5/31/2015 Alarms by Time of Day Dover Fire Department Call Time of Day Count 00:00 - 00:59 3 01:00 - 01:59 1 02:00 - 02:59 0 03:00 - 03:59 0 04:00 - 04:59 0 05:00 - 05:59 1 06:00 - 06:59 1 07:00 - 07:59 2 08:00 - 08:59 4 09:00 - 09:59 5 10:00 - 10:59 9 11:00 - 11:59 6 12:00 - 12:59 12 13:00 - 13:59 6 14:00 - 14:59 3 15:00 - 15:59 10 16:00 - 16:59 5 17:00 - 17:59 4 18:00 - 18:59 8 19:00 - 19:59 11 20:00 - 20:59 10 21:00 - 21:59 6 22:00 - 22:59 1 23:00 - 23:59 4 Total Alarms 112 Date: 6/29/2015 Page: 1

Date Range: From 5/1/2015 to 5/31/2015 Manpower Hours by Sitation Found Dover Fire Department Num ber of Hours by Situation Found Overpressure Rupture, Exp Sum of # Attending X Incident Length Rescue & Emergency Medica 204 Fire 0 Overpressure Rupture, Exp Fire 32 Rescue & Emergency Medica 188 Hazardous Condition (No F 92 Service Call 49 Good Intent Call 155 False Alarm & False Call 0 Severe Weather & Natural Hazardous Condition (No F 17 Special Incident Type Special Incident Type Severe Weather & Natural False Alarm & False Call Service Call Good Intent Call Date: 6/29/2015 Page: 1

1:11 PM Robbins Hose Company # 1, Inc. 06/30/15 Accrual Basis Profit & Loss Detail May 2015 Type Date Num Name Memo Ordinary Income/Expense Income City Quarterly Deposit Deposit 05/11/2015 239823 4th Quarter Deposit Total City Quarterly Deposit Total Income Expense Apparatus Repairs & Maintenance Check 05/11/2015 1326 Dover Automotive Acct # 4530 Check 05/11/2015 1328 State Janitorial Invoice # 276641-00- Oil Absorbant Check 05/11/2015 1329 T & T Small Engines Invoice # 72352 Check 05/11/2015 1329 T & T Small Engines Invoice # 72353 Check 05/11/2015 1329 T & T Small Engines Invoice # 72849 Check 05/17/2015 1331 Atlantic Emergency Solutions Invoice # 1112DEL- Lens, Dome LT, RED Check 05/17/2015 1335 RJS Repair Car 15- oil change, brakes, starter Check 05/17/2015 1336 RJS Repair 3 fuel injectors- Car 15 Total Apparatus Repairs & Maintenance Electricity Check 05/11/2015 1325 City of Dover Utility Acct # 44255-31966 Check 05/17/2015 1334 City of Dover Utility Acct # 44343-32052 Check 05/24/2015 1337 City of Dover Utility Acct # 44255-31966 Total Electricity Gasoline Check 05/17/2015 1333 City of Dover March- Unleaded gasoline Check 05/17/2015 1333 City of Dover March- Bio Diesel fuel Total Gasoline Heating Expenses- Gas Check 05/11/2015 1323 Chesapeake Utilities Station 2 from 03/30 to 04/30 Check 05/17/2015 1332 Chesapeake Utilities Station 1 frm 04/02 to 05/04 Page 1 of 4

1:11 PM Robbins Hose Company # 1, Inc. 06/30/15 Accrual Basis Profit & Loss Detail May 2015 Type Date Num Name Memo Total Heating Expenses- Gas Office Supplies Check 05/17/2015 1333 City of Dover March Postage expenses Total Office Supplies Telephone Check 05/11/2015 1324 Chief Technologies, LLC Web Hosting and Chief Messaging- April to Augu Check 05/11/2015 1330 Verizon Wireless Invoice # 9744268329- Ipads from 03/21 to 04/20 Check 05/17/2015 1333 City of Dover Verizon March charges Check 05/17/2015 1333 City of Dover Cavalier March charges Total Telephone Training & Travel Expenses Check 05/11/2015 1327 Priority Dispatch Corporation Course # 10122- EFD Total Training & Travel Expenses Water/Sewer Check 05/11/2015 1325 City of Dover Utility Acct # 44253-31964 Check 05/17/2015 1334 City of Dover Utility Acct # 44345-32054 Check 05/17/2015 1334 City of Dover Utility Acct # 444341-32050 Check 05/24/2015 1337 City of Dover Utility Acct # 44253-31964 Total Water/Sewer Total Expense Net Ordinary Income Net Income Page 2 of 4

1:11 PM Robbins Hose Company # 1, Inc. 06/30/15 Accrual Basis Profit & Loss Detail May 2015 Clr Split Amount Balance Ordinary Income/Expense Income City Quarterly Deposit City Fund Account 70,325.00 70,325.00 Total City Quarterly Deposit 70,325.00 70,325.00 Total Income 70,325.00 70,325.00 Expense Apparatus Repairs & Maintenance City Fund Account 13.01 13.01 City Fund Account 39.00 52.01 City Fund Account 74.30 126.31 City Fund Account 30.00 156.31 City Fund Account 83.94 240.25 City Fund Account 32.86 273.11 City Fund Account 1,011.48 1,284.59 City Fund Account 300.00 1,584.59 Total Apparatus Repairs & Maintenance 1,584.59 1,584.59 Electricity City Fund Account 517.23 517.23 City Fund Account 2,216.20 2,733.43 City Fund Account 952.27 3,685.70 Total Electricity 3,685.70 3,685.70 Gasoline City Fund Account 363.08 363.08 City Fund Account 805.90 1,168.98 Total Gasoline 1,168.98 1,168.98 Heating Expenses- Gas City Fund Account 277.29 277.29 City Fund Account 852.69 1,129.98 Page 3 of 4

1:11 PM Robbins Hose Company # 1, Inc. 06/30/15 Accrual Basis Profit & Loss Detail May 2015 Clr Split Amount Balance Total Heating Expenses- Gas 1,129.98 1,129.98 Office Supplies City Fund Account 18.55 18.55 Total Office Supplies 18.55 18.55 Telephone ust City Fund Account 342.00 342.00 0 City Fund Account 300.20 642.20 City Fund Account 277.40 919.60 City Fund Account 25.49 945.09 Total Telephone 945.09 945.09 Training & Travel Expenses City Fund Account 790.00 790.00 Total Training & Travel Expenses 790.00 790.00 Water/Sewer City Fund Account 33.47 33.47 City Fund Account 161.50 194.97 City Fund Account 5.00 199.97 City Fund Account 66.94 266.91 Total Water/Sewer 266.91 266.91 Total Expense 9,589.80 9,589.80 Net Ordinary Income 60,735.20 60,735.20 Net Income 60,735.20 60,735.20 Page 4 of 4

FY 14-15 City Funded Account Balance Sheet ACCOUNT BUDGET SPENT BALANCE Apparatus Repairs & Maintenance $ 85,300.00 $ 74,233.92 $ 11,066.08 Building Maintenace Supplies $ 1,500.00 $ 448.76 $ 1,051.24 Contractual Services $ 10,500.00 $ 10,500.00 $ - Electricity $ 45,000.00 $ 38,111.49 $ 6,888.51 Gasoline $ 20,000.00 $ 16,605.26 $ 3,394.74 Heating Expenses- Gas $ 16,000.00 $ 15,510.77 $ 489.23 Medical Supplies $ 1,000.00 $ - $ 1,000.00 Office Supplies $ 2,000.00 $ 640.16 $ 1,359.84 Other Equipment Repairs $ 2,000.00 $ 540.00 $ 1,460.00 Program Expenses $ 37,000.00 $ 36,052.91 $ 947.09 Radio Repairs $ 2,000.00 $ 1,263.75 $ 736.25 Safety & Security $ 1,500.00 $ 476.47 $ 1,023.53 Small Tools $ 4,500.00 $ 6,362.36 $ (1,862.36) Telephone $ 10,000.00 $ 7,763.71 $ 2,236.29 Training & Travel $ 10,000.00 $ 8,454.00 $ 1,546.00 Uniforms & Firefighting Gear $ 30,000.00 $ 31,656.50 $ (1,656.50) Water/ Sewer $ 3,000.00 $ 2,859.16 $ 140.84 Balance as of: 05/31/15

Dover Police Department Monthly Report To Mayor and City Council “To Protect and Serve” May 2015

DEPARTMENT OF POLICE Paul M. Bernat 400 South Queen Street Chief of Police Dover, Delaware 19904 F.B.I.N.A. 302-736-7111 Fax: 302-672-1842 July 6, 2015 Honorable Robin Christiansen, Mayor Members of Dover City Council City Hall Dover, DE 19901 Mayor Christiansen and Council Members: Starting with this report, we are including the statistics for murder and sudden death in the Criminal Investigations Section, as well as the arrests made by the Street Crimes Unit located in the Community Policing Section. The cadets continue their training and will be released to work in pairs on June 9, 2015. We will add the data from their citations beginning with the June Monthly Report. Along with the grant funds we are using to fund the current cadets, we are hoping to receive monies from the Building Block Grant Fund to increase the number of cadets as well as funding their salary for a longer period of time. The following is the monthly report for Dover Police Department activities for the month of May 2015: COMPLAINTS Total complaints received through May31, 2015, numbered 14,706; this is an increase of 942 complaints over the same time period last year. 16,000 14,936 14,500 14,706 13,265 13,764 11,000 6,000 1,000 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Report to Mayor and Council May 2015 Page 3 CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIONS 20 15 Cases Reported in May 10 10 Cases Cleared in May 5 4 4 Cases Cleared from Previous 5 2 1 0 1 1 1 Months 0 0 0 0 0 0 Burglary Robbery Rape Homicide Sudden Death COMMUNITY POLICING - SAFE STREETS & QUALITY OF LIFE ENFORCEMENT ACTION Contacts ALCOHOL VIOLATIONS/DUI’S 9 ASSIST OTHER 3 WARRANTS ON FILE 0 BIKE ON SIDEWALK 2 CITY PARK VIOLATIONS 0 CRIMINAL ARRESTS 55 DRUG RELATED ARRESTS 21 LOUD MUSIC 2 MISCELLANEOUS VIOLATIONS 8 PARKING VIOLATIONS 8 PEDDLER 0 MEETINGS 92 CURFEW CHECKS 76 CRIME PREVENTION CHECK 7 TRAFFIC ARRESTS 16 WARNINGS 3 FUGITIVE 15 TOTAL CONTACTS 309 TRAFFIC ARRESTS The department issued 5,383 traffic citations through this reporting period. This is a decrease of 1,271 citations over the number issued during the same period last year. 10,000 8,684 8,000 7,225 6,857 6,654 5,383 6,000 4,000 2,000 0 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Report to Mayor and Council May 2015 Page 4 TRAFFIC CRASHES Through May 31st, Dover Police investigated 729 traffic crashes. This is a decrease of 113 crashes 1,000 802 900 758 842 investigated during the same period last year. 746 729 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 911 CENTER During the month of May, the Dover Police Department handled a total of 10,969 calls 28% averaging 354 calls per day. Dispatchers handled 2,853 calls on the 911 wireless lines, 552 calls on the 911 landlines, and 256 calls on the 911 Wireless Voice Over Internet Protocol lines, the remaining 911 Landline 7,308 were administrative calls. VolP 63% 7% Administrative 2% CITY ORDINANCE SUMMONS 4,000 Through May 31st, we issued 2,651 city 3,500 ordinance summons, a decrease of 186 3,000 summonses over the same period last year. 2,500 *Note: Of those summonses issued in May, 2,000 20 DCO’s were issued for handicapped 1,500 parking violations, 5 for fire lane parking 1,000 violations, 69 for false alarms (0, for 1-2, 500 37, for 3-5 alarms, 17, for 6-9 alarms, 10, 0 for 10-15 alarms, and 5, for 16 or more 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 alarms) and for noise violations (5 for ISSUED 3,822 3,177 3,038 2,837 2,651 vehicle violations and 4 for residence PAID 2,390 2,736 1,812 2,003 1,586 violations).

Report to Mayor and Council May 2015 Page 5 SEX OFFENDER STATISTICS/APRIL MONTHLY NON COMPLIANT VERIFICATIONS NOTIFICATIONS REVERIFICATIONS WARRANTS TIER 1 0 0 0 1 TIER 2 19 1748 36 0 TIER 3 14 1578 21 0 ACTIVE SEX OFFENDERS THAT RESIDE IN THE CITY OF DOVER (please note, Tier 1 offenders are not contacted by Dover Police Sex Offender Agents). 200 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 APRIL MAY TIER 2 190 185 TIER 3 76 76 Please visit our website at www.doverpolice.org for up to date information on crimes and activities in the City of Dover. Respectfully Submitted, Paul M. Bernat Chief of Police

ACTION FORM PROCEEDING: City Council AGENDA ITEM NO.: DEPARTMENT OF ORIGIN: Public Works DATE SUBMITTED: 6/26/15 PREPARED BY: Sharon Duca, P.E., Public Works Director / City Engineer SUBJECT: Grant Application Evaluation - City of Dover Water Treatment Plant Process Improvements REFERENCE: CIP - Water Treatment Plant Process Improvements RELATED PROJECT: N/A APPROVALS: City Manager, Controller EXHIBITS: Attachment A – Department Grant Application Analysis Form EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $284,360 GRANT AMOUNT: $79,744 GRANT SOURCE: Delaware Health & Social Services (DHSS), Division of Public Health, Drinking Water Matching Planning Grant TIME TABLE: Grant application to be submitted to DHSS on July 17, 2015 and anticipated notification date of August 21, 2015. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Authorize staff to submit the grant application to DHSS for a Drinking Water Matching Planning Grant for the second phase of design for the City of Dover Water Treatment Plant Process Improvements project in accordance with the Finance Department’s Grant Application Procedure F317. BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS This Capital Investments Plan project includes the design and construction work necessary to upgrade and improve the plant processes at the Long Point Road Water Treatment Plant. In FY 2015, the following budget, and associated funding source, was proposed: FY 2015 Budget Data Expenditures FY 15 FY 16 FY 17 FY 18 FY 19 Total Design 175,000 175,000 Construction 500,000 700,000 1,200,000 Total 175,000 500,000 700,000 0 0 1,375,000 Funding Sources FY 15 FY 16 FY 17 FY 18 FY 19 Total Water / Wastewater 175,000 500,000 700,000 1,375,000 Fund Total 175,000 500,000 700,000 0 0 1,375,000 The design budget above, and the associated scope of work for design, was based upon the premise that the existing treatment methods at the plant would remain the same, albeit improved, as part of the overall project. Design, which included site visits and water sampling, began in the Fall of 2014. These efforts and associated analysis determined that the present treatment methods were no longer appropriate to reach

primary and secondary water quality standards in conjunction with the goal to upgrade the Long Point Road Water Treatment Plant to full capacity of four (4) million gallons per day (4 MGD). As a result, the scope of work for the design phase of the project must be revised. Based on the modified design requirements, we expect construction costs to be higher to reflect new treatment methods. Revised construction cost estimates will not be available until final design is completed, due to site specificity. It is anticipated that the firm construction costs will be available in time for FY 2017 Budget planning. Revised cost estimates and expenditures for this project are reflected below: Revised Expense Data Expenditures FY 15 FY 16 FY 17 FY 18 FY 19 Total Budget 175,000 500,000 700,000 TBD 1,375,000+ Design (Actual) 25,915 284,360 310,275 Construction Expense 215,640 TBD TBD TBD Total 25,915 500,000 700,000+ TBD 0 1,375,000+ Although adequate funds are available for project design in FY 2016, Public Works staff looked to find additional funding sources to help offset the increased costs. The second phase of design for this project, at a total cost of $284,360, qualifies for the Drinking Water Matching Planning Grant, which provides match amount funding for projects which include General Drinking Water Facility Plans and Project Plans and Specifications. The grant applies to studies which promote Drinking Water planning and funds the project through reimbursement. If approved by DHSS, the funding from this grant will supplement the budgeted amount for this capital project, with the maximum potential award this application round of $79,744. Should DHSS award the grant to the City the revised funding for the project would be as presented below: Revised DESIGN Funding Data Funding Sources FY 15 FY 16 FY 17 FY 18 FY 19 Total Water / Wastewater 25,915 204,616 230,531 Fund Drinking Water 79,744 79,744 Matching Planning Grant Total 25,915 284,360 0 0 0 310,275

Appendix A Department Grant Application Analysis Form For Use in Evaluating Grant Opportunities General Information Department: Public Works Staff Contact: Kate Mills Grant / Project Title: Drinking Water Matching Planning Grant / Water Treatment Plant Process Improvements Brief Grant / Project Description: Matching funds grant to subsidize studies that promote drinking water planning. / The Dover Water Treatment Plant is in need of rehabilitation to improve system performance and meet treatment requirements at peak production. AECOM will be providing evaluation services for this design project. CFDA# N/A Application Information Due Date: _7/17/2015__ New  Related Grants: Recurring Anticipated Award Date: ___8/19/2015___ Anticipated Notification Date: ___8/21/2015___ Start Date: __8/24/2015__ End Date: __3/24/2016____ Award Amount: $ ___$79,744.00__ Cash Reimbursement  Approx. reimbursement turn-a-around time Continuous throughout project Council Approval Needed: Yes  No Which apply? Match amount  (Council approval is needed for grant projects > $25,000, when match amounts Project shortage equal or exceed $25,000, or when expressly required by the granting authority.) Other grant requirement Grant/Project Costs Budget Category Award Amt Match Amt Match Source $79,744 $204,616 Water/Wastewater Contractual Fund Equipment/Supplies Indirect Cost (ie, vehicle repairs, mileage, IT, telephone) Personnel Additional Personnel/Over-time (ie, support costs, administrative salaries) Travel/Training Capital (ie, land, building, vehicles, etc.) Other (ie, informant/buy Money) Total $79,744 $204,616 GRANT TOTAL $284,360 (Award + Match) FI 105

Finance Department Grant Application Procedures F317 Appendix A-continued Department Grant Application Analysis Form For Use in Evaluating Grant Opportunities Other Information 1. Are any of this project’s costs included in the City budget? Yes 2. Are there any lone-term costs or commitments? No 3. How will this program/project be funded after the grant expires? Water/Wastewater Fund 4. What is the maximum amount of funds available from this funding source? $300,000 5. If the Department receives only a portion of the amount requested, how will the project be funded? Water/Wastewater Fund 6. Are there other departments in the City eligible for this funding? No 7. Are other departments in the City willing to collaborate on this project? N/A 8. Will this project duplicate or compete with other services or programs provided by the City or other local agency: No FI105 2