Pwosè vèbal

LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE The Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee meeting was held on May 27, 2014, at 6:01 p.m. with Chairman Lynn presiding. Members present were Mr. Hare (arrived at 6:29 p.m.), Mr. Slavin, and Mr. Shevock. Mr. Rushe was absent. Other members of Council present were Mr. Anderson (arrived at 6:05 p.m.), Mr. Dixon, and Mr. Hutchison (arrived at 6:09 p.m.). AGENDA ADDITIONS/DELETIONS Mr. Slavin moved for approval of the agenda, seconded by Mr. Shevock and unanimously carried. Discussion - Fiscal Year 2014 Audit Program Mrs. Donna Mitchell, Controller/Treasurer, reviewed a presentation entitled “Auditor’s Responsibility for Communicating with Audit Committee.” She reminded members that the Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee had served as the City’s Audit Committee during the last few years and that she typically provides a similar presentation to members each year at the commencement of the audit cycle. Mrs. Mitchell noted that the 2014 Audit Calendar was provided and included the dates that the draft and final audit report would be brought before the Committee. Mr. Slavin moved to recommend acceptance of the Fiscal Year 2014 Audit Program, seconded by Mr. Shevock and unanimously carried. Proposed Grant-In-Aid Policy Mrs. Donna Mitchell, Controller/Treasurer, reminded members that, during their Regular Meeting of January 27, 2014, City Council accepted the City of Dover FY 2015 Grant-In-Aid Application and Procedures, as recommended by the Committee. She stated that, since that time, she had updated this document, which was similar to that used in the State of Delaware grant-in-aid process, to incorporate a “Policy Objective” in the Grant-in-Aid Application Instructions. Mrs. Mitchell reviewed the Policy Objective and inquired if members had any suggestions for change. Mr. Slavin moved to recommend acceptance of the proposed Grant-In-Aid Policy (Attachment #1), seconded by Mr. Shevock and unanimously carried. Request of Dover Housing Authority for City of Dover to Serve as Responsible Entity for Environmental Reviews Chairman Lynn advised members that a memorandum in regard to this matter from Ami Sebastian Hauer, Executive Director, Dover Housing Authority (DHA), dated May 27, 2014, (Attachment #2) had been received earlier in the day and circulated to members by email. Mrs. Ann Marie Townshend, Director of Planning and Community Development, advised members that, in July 2013, the DHA requested that the City of Dover serve as its Responsible Entity for Environmental Reviews in accordance with Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) regulations. The City Manager, City Planner, and Community Development Manager met with DHA staff several months ago to discuss a draft agreement and the expectations of the City under the draft

LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MEETING OF MAY 27, 2014 PAGE 2 agreement. Based on the information presented, City staff verbally agreed that the commitment was acceptable. Following this discussion with the DHA, the City’s Community Development Manager attended HUD training and discussed the responsible entity responsibilities with a HUD staff person responsible for environmental reviews. Based on the information obtained in this interaction with HUD, the City’s responsibilities as the responsible entity would be far more significant than originally conveyed by the DHA. Mrs. Townshend stated that, after discussing this matter with HUD, staff was advised that if the City of Dover did not agree to serve as the responsible entity, HUD would request that the Delaware State Housing Authority (DSHA) take on this responsibility and if the State declines, HUD would perform this role. She explained that the decision of the City not to enter into an agreement to serve as the responsible entity would not inhibit the DHA’s eligibility to accept HUD funding. Mrs. Townshend informed members that all federal funds spent are subject to the National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA), as well as other related acts, including the State Historic Preservation Act. For any project undertaken by DHA, a review would be required to determine: 1) if the scope of services is exempt from NEPA requirements, or 2) if there is a finding that must be pursued. Although most DHA projects consist of minor capital projects or minor rehabilitation of existing facilities and would be exempt, all of DHA’s investment plans would have to be reviewed, not just the capital plan. Many of the maintenance projects imbedded in the operating budget could also be subject to environmental reviews. Staff determined that quite a bit of paperwork, project management, contract management, and oversight would be required and Mrs. Townshend stated that the City did not have adequate staff at this point to perform these functions. She explained that several years ago when one (1) of the planners left the Planning Department, a planner position was eliminated and the associated responsibilities were combined with the Community Development Manager position. The current Community Development Manager was now performing planning and community development work. Since the scope of the DHA’s funding is much larger than that received by the City of Dover from HUD through the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program, the amount of responsibility in terms of environmental reviews would be exponentially greater. Mrs. Townshend indicated that she had been advised by HUD that HUD would take responsibility for environmental reviews associated with current funding that was being held from Federal FY 2013 because there was no responsible entity in place for the DHA; therefore, the current request was for the City to serve as responsible entity beyond FY 2013. Staff recommended that the City not agree to be the Dover Housing Authority’s responsible entity for environmental reviews. Mr. Lynn stated that, in reviewing the memo received from the DHA earlier in the day, it appeared that many of the concerns would be ameliorated because the DHA would hire a third-party entity to conduct environmental reviews and would pay for these reviews. He questioned if the concern was that many of the smaller capital projects would not need environmental review. Mrs. Townshend confirmed that this was the case and that there would be a good deal of documentation that would require review, records would need to be maintained, and staff would have to look at the exact scope

LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MEETING OF MAY 27, 2014 PAGE 3 of each of DHA’s projects to determine if they were exempt from the requirement for an environmental review. For example, although cleaning projects would be exempt, staff would have to determine if an environmental review would be required for projects such as painting, changing cabinets, and working with the HVAC system. Responding to Mr. Slavin regarding the nature of activities that would be considered exempt, Mrs. Townshend stated that there would be a categorical exclusion for activities that had no environmental impact. She confirmed that these exclusions could change over time and there would be a need to develop a knowledge base regarding what had and had not been excluded in the past. Mrs. Townshend provided two (2) related memoranda, dated May 17, 2010, from HUD - Philadelphia Office (Attachment #3) regarding environmental reviews as they relate to operating funds that are in the operating budget and to public housing authorities. Mrs. Townshend advised members that even minor capital projects that come under the operating budget would have to go through the process. She stated that staff would have to expand their expertise and workload and she felt that this responsibility could not be absorbed at this point. Mr. Shevock questioned what the City’s financial exposure would be by taking on this responsibility, if the City could be responsible for possible class action suits that might arise, or if there would be a need to pay for insurance to protect the City. Responding, Mrs. Townshend stated that HUD did not anticipate that the City would end up with sanctions; however, if a related Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) were signed, the City would be taking on the legal responsibility for environmental reviews. She felt that if the City were to sign off on a large capital project and state that there was no significant impact and there was such an impact, the City could be vulnerable. Mr. Shevock stated that environmental engineering firms perform this type of work and questioned why they would not be under contract to the DHA to complete the necessary paperwork. In response, Mrs. Townshend stated that much of the work would be contracted to an environmental firm; however, there was a requirement for a legal entity to monitor this paperwork, “make the final calls,” ensure that projects are done, perform record keeping, and ensure that projects that are determined to fit the definition of a categorical exclusion actually do so. She noted that HUD staff had cited examples in the City’s region where housing authorities did not provide the information needed to make the correct decision to the unit of local government as it relates to the environmental review process. In response to Mr. Lynn regarding the resultant effect on the DHA if the City did not assume this responsibility, Mrs. Townshend stated that the DHA would continue as they are now and would have to find out if the State would take on this role. If the State chose not to do so, HUD would do this. It would not affect DHA’s ability to obtain capital funds and there would be no problem with its funding in the interim while the responsible entity is determined. Mrs. Townshend stated that HUD had assured her that they were taking care of the work for the current funding of the DHA. Mr. Slavin advised members that NEPA is supposed to be conducted by the federal agency involved and that HUD was the only federal agency he was aware of that pushes this responsibility down to the grantees. As a result, a very technical review process was being pushed to organizations that are not engineered to perform this review. In his opinion, involving the City would not be the proper

LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MEETING OF MAY 27, 2014 PAGE 4 course and this should be directed back to HUD so that HUD can live up to the federal law. Mr. Slavin indicated that almost every federal agency has a federal historic preservation officer who handles this side of the NEPA process, conducts reviews, determines what falls under categorical exclusions, and makes these decisions or hires a firm to manage this. Responding to Mr. Anderson regarding whether the subcontractor performing the work would be liable if the work was misconducted, Mrs. Townshend stated that the contractor would have culpability; however, as the government agency signing off on projects, she felt that the City would also incur some culpability if something were missed. Mr. Anderson inquired if this process had caused a delay in the release of hundreds of thousands of dollars in funding. Mrs. Townshend stated that this was the case. She indicated that during a conference call with HUD approximately two (2) weeks ago, she asked who had been performing this responsibility prior to the current time. HUD advised her that they had received an email that indicated that the City of Dover was doing so and, at some point after they received this email, HUD requested a MOU and funds began to be held because no MOU was provided. It was HUD’s understanding that the City of Dover had agreed to be the responsible entity, had been performing this function, and had decided to no longer do so. Mrs. Townshend stated that she explained to HUD that the City had not been acting in this capacity and, once the Public Housing Office realized that the City had not been acting in this role, they assured Mrs. Townshend that the City of Dover was under no obligation to serve as the responsible entity, that HUD would serve as the responsible entity and oversee environmental reviews for the current round of funding allocated to DHA, HUD would not hold these funds, and that this would not affect DHA’s ability to receive funds. However, HUD indicated that a responsible entity needed to be designated. Mr. Hutchison inquired if the agreement had been reviewed by the City Solicitor. Mrs. Townshend explained that the City Solicitor reviewed a previous draft of the agreement; however, this was before additional information was received from HUD and staff concluded that this was not a role that the City could take on. Mr. Lynn inquired about the ratio of the projects that would come under the umbrella of a third-party entity versus those that would go through the City. Responding, Mrs. Townshend stated that ultimately everything would go through the City. She indicated that currently there were only small capital minor rehabilitation projects involved that would likely not be contracted out and would be determined to be exempt from the requirements. However, these projects would be submitted to the City for a review of project scope and a determination regarding exemption would have to be made. New, large projects, such as building new public housing, acquiring new sites, or taking down and rebuilding existing projects, would be contracted to a third party. Ms. Ami Sebastian Hauer, Executive Director, DHA, advised members that capital improvement work undertaken by the DHA is mainly done through the capital fund program. The funding available through operating funds is used for routine work and to cover administration. She stated that capital fund money is used for improving and upgrading units because operating funds are not available, noting that funding cuts occur every year.

LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MEETING OF MAY 27, 2014 PAGE 5 Mr. Lynn questioned if an environmental review under the purview of the City would be required if a unit damaged by a tenant was in need of repair, such as repainting or redoing the kitchen, following the departure of a tenant. Responding, Ms. Hauer stated that capital fund projects would involve upgrades to the HVAC system, reinforcement of stairwells, installation of air conditioning in public housing units to improve air quality, etc. Mr. Anderson inquired why it would be better to have the City involved than HUD. Responding, Ms. Hauer stated that HUD had informed the DHA that because they are within the City of Dover and must comply with local building codes and City ordinances, it was felt it that it would make more sense for the City of Dover to become the responsible entity. In regard to how the DHA would deal with staffing issues, she explained that the DHA would assume all responsibility for any associated costs, including staffing, contracting, and training of those working on the environmental review process. In response to Mr. Slavin regarding why the DHA did not choose to perform the function required since they were willing to pay for it, Ms. Hauer stated that HUD prefers that a legal entity, such as the City of Dover, assume the responsibilities. Mr. Anderson noted that HUD regulations would not allow the DHA to be its own responsible entity. Mr. Scott Koenig, City Manager, advised members that the City was stretched very thin at the staff level and if the City did not absolutely have to perform this function, staff’s preference was that it not. He noted that those involved with federal regulations know that these regulations do not get any easier. Mr. Koenig expressed his fear that if the City assumed the responsible entity role, it could become more complicated as the regulations get more stringent, change, or evolve. He reiterated that it was staff’s recommendation not to take this on. He concurred with Mr. Slavin that this was an odd process in that the federal agency had pushed this responsibility down to the local level. Responding to Mr. Lynn regarding the term of the MOU that would be required, Mrs. Townshend stated that the draft MOU had a ten-year term. Based on the City’s current experience with HUD, it was her belief that if the City were to enter into an agreement, there would be quite a bit more scrutiny if the City felt the need to back out at some point. Mrs. Townshend reiterated that when HUD believed that the City had agreed to serve as the responsible entity and had decided not to serve any longer, HUD staff was very stern in their “push back” in discussions regarding the City not performing this function. Noting Mr. Koenig’s concern that the responsibility could become more cumbersome in the future due to legislative changes, Mr. Lynn questioned if this could be addressed by shortening the term of the agreement, noting that this would allow the City to observe the manpower time that would be invested. He inquired if the ten-year term was mandated. He also noted that if the DHA would hire a third-party entity to perform the work, this entity would be paid for by the DHA and presumably the third party would indemnify the City and hold the City harmless. Responding, Mrs. Townshend stated her belief that the ten-year term was not mandated; however, she did not believe that the City had the staff time to ensure quality control under the provisions of the current agreement. She advised members that under the CDBG program, the City receives approximately $250,000 per year from HUD. Of that, less than $100,000 goes to projects that are subject to NEPA, since most funds are used for down payment assistance, program administration, money provided to the Dover

LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MEETING OF MAY 27, 2014 PAGE 6 Interfaith Mission for Housing and are not subject to NEPA. HUD stated that they would accept responsibility for $400,000 in Federal FY 2013 funds; therefore, she stated that staff would be looking at expanding the $100,000 that the City is currently responsible for in rehabilitations to $500,000 with the DHA capital program. This task could be contracted out but the City would still have to ensure that all of the paperwork is correct. Mrs. Townshend felt that saying the work could be contracted out minimized the fact that staff would have to put forth the effort to make sure that everything is done correctly. Mr. Slavin stated his understanding of everything that the DHA was going through and what they were trying to accomplish; however, he felt that the City should take a stand that this was almost an unfunded federal mandate that was washing down to local government without any funding attached to it. Even if funding were present, he reminded members that the City was considering a proposed budget that requires more than a 20% increase in property taxes and hiking many fees in order to break even, and provides the same number of man hours next year that are present in the current year. He cautioned members about the need to be careful regarding taking on any additional tasks, especially those that are not in the core mission of the City. Mr. Slavin moved to accept staff’s recommendation that City Council agree not to be the Dover Housing Authority’s responsible entity for environmental reviews, seconded by Mr. Shevock and carried by a vote of three (3) yes (Mr. Slavin, Mr. Shevock, and Mr. Hare) and one (1) no (Lynn). Proposed Ordinance #2014-16 Amending Appendix E - Commercial and Industrial Building Redevelopment (Sponsors: Anderson and Townshend) Mrs. Ann Marie Townshend, Director of Planning and Community Development, reminded members that, during their Regular Meeting of April 9, 2012, Council adopted Proposed Ordinance #2012-07, amending the City of Dover Code of Ordinances by inserting a new Appendix E - Commercial and Industrial Building Redevelopment. She advised members that Appendix E had proved successful and, as a result, she and Councilman Anderson had discussed extending the provisions of this ordinance. Mrs. Townshend explained that Proposed Ordinance #2014-16 would extend the sunset provision for the tax abatement, impact fee waiver, and building permit waiver incentives for three (3) years. Mr. Anderson advised members that the incentives associated with this ordinance had been quite successful in relation to business entities, such as Redner’s Warehouse Markets, and benefitted new businesses as well as existing businesses that wished to expand. He stated that, with the end of the trial for the incentives now approaching, he felt that extending the incentives would allow the economic development team to market the City with some degree of certainty. Instead of wondering if one (1) of “the better tools in their toolbox” would be lost in six (6) months, the economic development team could use the leverage of a three (3) year extension to entice businesses to act more quickly in making decisions. Mr. Anderson noted that the incentive had worked very well in the City for organizations that are operated for profit as well as for taxable but non-profit organizations, including the cultural buildings being constructed downtown. Mr. Slavin moved to recommend adoption of Proposed Ordinance #2014-16, seconded by Mr. Hare and unanimously carried.

LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MEETING OF MAY 27, 2014 PAGE 7 By unanimous consent, the meeting adjourned at 6:43 p.m. Sean M. Lynn Chairman SML/TM/js/dd S:\AGENDAS-MINUTES-PACKETS-PRESENTATIONS-ATT&EXH\Committee-Minutes\2014\05-27-2014 LF&A.wpd Attachments Attachment #1 - Proposed Grant-In-Aid Policy Attachment #2 - Memorandum from Ami Sebastian Hauer, Executive Director, Dover Housing Authority (DHA), dated May 27, 2014 Attachment #3 - Two (2) Memoranda from HUD - Philadelphia Office, dated May 17, 2010, Related to Environmental Reviews

ATTACHMENT #1 LF&A Committee Meeting of 05/27/2014 CIUOF DOVER GRANT -IN-AID APPLICATION INSTRUCTIONS Funding Requests Are Due No Later Than 4:30 p.m., Friday, November 1, 20xx. City of Dover Finance Department P.O. Box 475 Dover, Delaware 19903 OR Finance Department Weyandt Hall 5 E. Reed Street, Suite 300 Dover, Delaware 19901 Applications can be downloaded from the City website To save the document to your computer from the website you must do the following: + Go the http:// + Click on the Grant-In-Aid Application link; + Right-click on the Word document (FY15 GIA Application.doc); + Left click on Save As or Save Target As; + Select where to save the file . For technical assistance for downloading document please call the Finance Department at 302-736-7018.

FUNDING REQUESTS ARE DUE ON OR BEFORE FRIDAY NOVEMBER 1, 20xx. This funding request format has been designed to provide for a tightly focused and informative presentation of the organization's request for funds based on a clear statement of the organization's purpose (or goals and objectives); a concise description, the financing requirements, and anticipated accomplishments for each of the programs or services being offered to meet these purposes; and the resulting total organization projections of income and expenses. PLEASE READ ALL THE MATERIAL CAREFULLY BEFORE PREPARING THE REQUEST. Additional supplemental material may be requested by the Grant-in-Aid Committee. We are requesting that each organization provide the original and one copy of the funding request and one copy of your most recent audit and the audit's management letter or a compilation statement, by a Certified Public Accountant or independent Public Accountant. DO NOT SUBMIT TAX FORMS. Please number each page and indicate organization name on each page. Please do not staple your application. GENERAL DIRECTIONS 1. Fiscal Year- Your budget request from the State of Delaware is for the period July 1, 2014 through June 30, 2015. Information involving audited data or historical financial data will be based on your organization's fiscal year. The information for prior year would be taken from your organization's audit or compilation statement. PLEASE NOTE: Organizations using fiscal years should apply the following : Prior Year- FY 2013 Current Year- FY 2014 Proposed Year- FY 2015 Organizations using calendar years should apply the following: Prior Year- 2012 Current Year - 2013 Proposed Year - 2014 2

2. Rounding Figures - All figures should be rounded to the nearest hundred dollar. 3. Labeling - Please type the organization name clearly on each form as the forms may be separated during processing. 4. COMPLETE ENTIRE APPLICATION - ANSWER ALL QUESTIONS; EXPLAIN WHY A PARTICULAR QUESTION MAY NOT APPLY TO YOUR ORGANIZATION. 5. Forward completed application by November 1. 20xx. to: Finance Department Weyandt Hall P.O. Box 475 Dover, Delaware 19903 OR Controller/Treasurer Weyandt Hall 5 E. Reed Street, Suite 300 Dover, Delaware 19901 3

POLICY OBJECTIVE The purpose of this policy is to standardize the method by which the City of Dover provides financial assistance for community events sponsored by non-profit organizations that benefit all of the Citizens of Dover or enhances the City's Economic Development initiatives. The applicant must be a non-profit organization incorporated in the State of Delaware and is located in the City of Dover. Any public funding request will be limited to the purpose of this policy as described above. All City of Dover policies are to subject to the City of Dover Charter Part II Code of Ordinances Chapter 2, Article 1, Division 4 "Code of Conduct", which is licable to all elected and appointed officials and to all employees of the City of In consideration of these guidelines and policies, should be on a strict, rather than loose, construction basis, and obviously, the be to rationalize ways and means for circumvention. The City of Dover Grant-In-Aid Policy will be Council. 4

GUIDELINES FOR FY 2015 GRANTS-IN-AID A. Only non-profit organizations are eligible to apply for Grant-In-Aid. · B. No funds will be appropriated for the purpose of paying personnel cost, relocation, purchasing buildings or rehabilitation or renovation of buildings. C. In order for an organization to be considered for a Grant-In-Aid for FY 2015, the organization must: of ng (budget) procedures and an annual audit. sin accordance with the application. 10. Demonstrate community support. 11. Request funds only for a program which does not receive full funding from other sources of revenue. 5

Instructjons; Form 1 MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION Official Name: Indicate legal name of organization on Incorporation Certificate or other legal documents. Please list any additional names your organization uses-if a trade name or other operating name is used. Address of Management Office: Where should co and checks, etc., be forwarded? P.O. Box, please include Physical Address Contact Representative: Indicate: ,, ~ ~ ~/ ' '' -~~se provide t ~ rganization background in a concise na~~e as foil -~ 1. ~~ . .·~ tbn mission statement; 2. Organization location(s), days and hours of operation. 6

Instructions: Form 3 REVENUE This form requests the total revenue for your organization. Note that the categories are by sources of revenue as follows: Federal Government State Government City Government In-Kind City Services (estimated va Investment Sale of Materials Dues Contributions or Donations Miscellaneous Other Also, Federal Government and as shown on the form. Be sure to i and State Government revenues. The total of all revenue ,~~ ( ' ' ~J:-Jorm is used ~port ca~ of disbursif~ ts. ~ rsements by your organization by ~~ge is used to report operating expenses of your The top ~-~ron of th organizatiori~ , ~ The lower portio , ~J categories. •. sed to report non-expense disbursements by various Total Expenses and the Total Non-Expense Disbursements should be reported on the Total Disbursement line at the bottom of the form. 7

Instryctions. Form 5 FEDERAL & STATE GRANTS This form recei ve requests a re d through . State Grants. your organization has th e Federal portmg & of all f . undmg List the project name, fiscal year in which amount. . the award was made, and the ~ ~' "~ ,~~~~ ' Ali! ' ' ~ \~~~'' ' p ~' ,~~ ' ~ r ~ ~~~\ ~ ~~' ~,, '''' ~ ' '' J ~ 8

Instructjoos; Form 6 SUMMARY This report consolidates the revenue (Form 3) and disbursements (Form 4). Line 1 Total revenue from Form 3. Line 2 Total disbursements from Form 4. Line 3 Line 1 and Line 2. Line 4 Carryover - This line should column the available bala For the current year's amount on Line 5 for the Line 5 Line 6 previous year amount of the should be reflected on 7, the total of all these I Form 6, Line 6. 9

Instructjons; Form 7 PROGRAM INFORMATION Note: One page is required for each program. Line 1 Program Name & Target Population: indicate name of program and who the service is targeting. How do you make the target population aware of the service? Line 2 Program Description- indicate the activities associated with this program. Line 3 Which other community organ similar services? Indicate Line 4 Line 5 Line 6 Line 7 nights of shelter ten people (the same people or different people) for five hours per day, 250 days per year, the <:l'o r-..,r·o would be 12,500 hours of training. Line 9 Line 10 Program disbursements Line 11 Difference between Lines 9 and 10. Line 12 Program Grant-in-Aid - Proposed year should reflect that portion of Form 6, Line 6 that applies to this program. 10

Instructjons; Form 8 SCHEDULE OF POSITIONS & SALARIES Please list all positions filled by your organization, the number of employees in each position, and the salary and salary range of each position. Indicate that your organization ""' 0'"~m and the date that the application your organization. FORMS IN PLACE OF AN AUDIT OR .......,_..... ENTS. 11

CITY OF DOVER GRANT-IN-AID APPLICATION FORM FY 2015 FUNDING REQUESTS ARE DUE NO LATER THAN (TIME, DAY, DATE}. Official Name of Organization : Date of Incorporation: 9 digit Federal Employer Identification No.: DDDDDDDDD Contact Representative: Phone Number (daytime) : E-mail address: YES NO Are you a first time applicant? DO Did you receive a Grant-in-Aid Award in Fiscal Year 2014? DO If yes, does this application include a request to fund a new program? DO Is your organization receiving or has your organization received Grant in Aid from other government agencies? DO If yes, what is the total amount of Grant in Aid money received from other government agencies? $

FORM 1 ORGANIZATION: YEAR: 2015 MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION Official Name of Organization: Address of Management Office: Street Address or Location: Physical Location of organization for site visits Phone Number: Contact Representative: Name: Address: Phone Number: (Daytime) E-Mail Address: Names of Board of Directors and Daytime Telephone Numbers: Names of Officers and Daytime Telephone Numbers

FORM 2 ORGANIZATION : YEAR: 2015 ORGANIZATION BACKGROUND ORGANIZATION MISSION STATEMENT: ORGANIZATION LOCATION(s) where services are actually provided, days and hours of operation for site visits.

FORM 3 ORGANIZATION: YEAR: 2015 REVENUE Revenue Source Previous Year Current Year Proposed Year FEDERAL GOVERNMENT MEDICARE MEDICAID . GRANTS OTHER STATE GOVERNMENT GRANT IN AID CONTRACTSBYSTATEAGENCY CITY OF DOVER GRANT IN AID xxxxxxxxxx OTHER (LIST) INVESTMENTS DIVIDENDS & INTEREST SALE OF ASSETS SALE MATERIALS DUES CONTRIBUTIONS or DONATIONS MISCELLANEOUS TOTAL REVENUE

FORM 4 ORGANIZATION: YEAR: 2015 DISBURSEMENTS Previous Year Current Year Proposed Year EXPENSES Salaries Employee Benefits Payroll Taxes Professional Fees Supplies Telephone and Fax Postage Rent Utilities Repairs and Maintenance Printing and Publications Travel, Conferences and Meetings Dues Assistance to Individuals Grants and Awards (other than Grant in Aid) Other (List) Miscellaneous TOTAL EXPENSES NON-EXPENSE DISBURSEMENTS Equipment Vehicles Mortgage/Loans Investments Other TOTAL NON-EXPENSE DISBURSEMENTS TOTAL DISBURSEMENTS

FORM 5 ORGANIZATION : YEAR: 2015 SA. FEDERAL & STATE GRANTS If you are a Federal/State Grant Recipient, please complete this form; Name of Project Fiscal Year Amount $

FORM 6 ORGANIZATION: YEAR: 2015 SUMMARY Previous Current Proposed Year Year Year 1 TOTAL REVENUE on Form 3 2 TOTAL DISBURSEMENTS on Form 4 3 OPERATING SURPLUS/DEFICIT 4 CARRYOVER 5 NET SURPLUS/DEFICIT 6 GRANT IN AID REQUEST Programs from Form 7 to be funded through Grant in Aid in FY 2015 Amount Requested 7 TOTAL (THIS LINE SHOULD EQUAL LINE 6 OF PROPOSED YEAR COLUMN)

FORM 7 ORGANIZATION: YEAR: 2015 PROGRAM INFORMATION 1. Program Name & Target Population : 2. Program Description: 3. Which other community organizations provide this or similar services? 4. How will the program obtain its objective & how will the outcomes be measured? 5. What progress has been made in the past year to achieve the program's objectives? Previous Current Proposed Year Award - -- · -Award ------ ---- -- - -~ - 6. Number of People Served 7. Service Measure 8. Amount of Service 9. Program Revenue 10. Program Disbursements 11. Surplus/Deficit 12. Amount of Grant in Aid Requested for this Program - ~- - -

FORM 8 ORGANIZATION: YEAR: 2014 SCHEDULE OF ALL POSITIONS AND SALARIES SUPPORTING ACTUAL EXPENSES AND BUDGET ESTIMATES FOR AGENCY STAFF Position Title Number of Salary Range Previous Current Proposed Positions Salarv Salary Salary $ $ $ $

FORM 9 ORGANIZATION: YEAR: 2014 (ORGANIZATION) AGREES: 1. To submit funding requests on the forms provided at the times designated and to participate in the allocations review process. 2. To provide an annual certified audit and other financial statements, service figures, and reports or audits as required by the City of Dover. 3. To cooperate with other organizations, both voluntary and public, in responding to the needs of the community and in promoting high standards of efficiency and effectiveness. 4. To submit accurate information with this application. NOTE: Any misstatement of facts may forfeit any remaining balance of grants due and/or future grants. 5. That this organization meets the criteria established (City Council will need to establish criteria for eligibility) and uses any Grant-in-Aid appropriated by the City Council in accordance with those provisions and any additional restrictions that may be set forth in the Grant-in-Aid policy. 6. This agency agrees to provide the City Controller/Treasurer with financial or programmatic information upon request. This agreement has been read and approved at the meeting of the governing body of the (ORGANIZATION'S NAME AND DATE) BY: (President or Chairman) DATE Daytime Phone Number: (Executive Director) DATE

FORM 10 COPY OF MOST RECENT AUDIT PREPARED BY INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBUC ACCOUNTANT OR PUBUC ACCOUNTANT SAMPLE A-B-C ATTACHED MAY BE SUBSTITUTED FOR ABOVE IF RECENT AUDIT IS NOT AVAILABLE. DO NOT SEND TAX FORMS

SAMPLE A ORGANIZAITON: YEAR: 2015 BALANCE SHEETS FOR FISCAL YEARS ENDING (MONTH) 2012 AND 2013 (MONTH), 2012 (MONTH), 2013 ASSETS Cash Accounts Receivable Investments - at cost (market value $ _) PROPERTY AND EQUIPMENT- at cost Land Buildings and Improvements Furniture and Equipment Transportation Equipment Less Accumulated Depreciation TOTAL ASSETS LIABILITIES AND FUND BALANCES Accounts payable and accrued expenses Grants designed for future periods Fund balances Undesignated Designated TOTAL LIABILITIES AND FUND BALANCES

SAMPLE B ORGANIZATION: YEAR: 2015 STATEMENT OF SUPPORT. REVENUE AND EXPENSES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES FOR YEARS ENDING JUNE 30. 2012 AND 2013 (MONTH), 2012 (MONTH), 2013 PUBLIC SUPPORT AND REVENUE Contributions Allocated by United Way of DE Fees and grants from government agencies Otherrevenue(losses) Investment Income Gain(loss) on sale of investments Miscellaneous EXPENSES Program Services Supporting Services Management and General EXCESS (DEFICIENCY) OF PUBLIC SUPPORT AND REVENUE OVER EXPENSES FUND BALANCES Beginning of year previously reported End of Year

SAMPLE C ORGANIZATION: YEAR: 2015 STATEMENTS OF FUNCTIONAL EXPENSES YEARS ENDING (MONTH), 2012 AND 2013 Program Supporting Total Expenses Services Services Year ending (MONTH), 2012 Salaries Employee Benefits Payroll Taxes Professional Fees Supplies Telephone & Utilities Postage and Shipping Rent Maintenance Printing and Publications Travel Conferences & Meetings Assistance to Individuals Membership Dues Awards and Grants Miscellaneous Depreciation Program Supporting Total Expenses Services Services Year ending (MONTH), 2013 Salaries Employee Benefits Payroll Taxes Professional Fees Sl!Qf>lies Telephone & Utilities Postage and Shipping Rent Maintenance Printing and Publications Travel Conferences & Meetings Assistance to Individuals Membership Dues Awards and Grants Miscellaneous Depreciation

ATTACHMENT #2 LF&A Committee Meeting of 05/27/2014 76 Stevenson Drive Dover, DE 19901 302-678-1965 voice 302-678-1971 fax 1-800-545-1833, ext. 816 TDD dover.housingauthority@dhade.org email MEMORANDUM Date: May 27, 2014 To: City Council Scott D. Koenig, City Manager Ann Marie Townshend, Director of Planning & Community Development From: Ami Sebastian Hauer, Executive Director, Dover Housing Authority RE: Request from Dover Housing Authority for City of Dover to Act as Responsible Entity for Environmental Reviews On behalf of the Board of Commissioners and staff of the Dover Housing Authority, I am requesting the Legislative, Finance and Administration Committee’s consideration in recommending the approval of the City of Dover to enter into an agreement with the Dover Housing Authority to become the Responsible Entity for Environmental Reviews on behalf of the Dover Housing Authority. The Dover Housing Authority understands that this agreement will create additional responsibilities and duties for City of Dover staff, therefore we offer the following provisions to the Agreement: 1. The City of Dover may contract an outside agency/company to conduct the Environmental Review and prepare the required report; said agency/company to be procured following the City of Dover’s Procurement Policies; 2. The Dover Housing Authority will assume responsibility for any and all costs associated with the completion of the Environmental Review process and report; 3. The Dover Housing Authority will assume responsibility for any and all costs associated with the training of the agency/company selected to complete the Environment Review process, if necessary; 4. The Environmental Review process will be limited to no more than two reports a year. The Dover Housing Authority prepares an Annual Plan and 5-Year Plan as a requirement for its Capital Fund Program for submission and approval by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) on an annual basis. Upon approval and

availability of funding levels, an Environmental Review must be completed prior to starting any capital improvements. The Dover Housing Authority will submit its Annual Plan and 5-Year Plan to the City of Dover upon approval by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. In her memo to City Council, Ms. Townshend expressed concerns over the competence of the Dover Housing Authority and challenges the City of Dover has encountered in working with our organization in the past. To address those concerns, we submit the following: 1. In 2009, I contacted former City Manager, Anthony DePrima, regarding the Responsible Entity requirement by HUD. We discussed it briefly, but a written agreement was not pursued because the Dover Housing Authority’s capital improvement projects did not require a full, complete environmental review. 2. When I initially submitted the request to the City of Dover, and subsequently met with Mr. Koenig, Ms. Townshend, and Ms. Harvey, I mistakenly stated that the Dover Housing Authority (with assistance from our Architectural/Engineering firm on contract) would complete the review for the smaller capital improvement projects as 95% of Dover Housing Authority’s projects are renovation projects and considered “Categorically Excluded”. This was incorrect, the Dover Housing Authority cannot make any determination with regard to its projects. During the meeting, the provision of the City of Dover contracting a firm to conduct the review and prepare any required reports, and the Dover Housing Authority assuming any and all costs associated with the contract, was discussed. 3. The Dover Housing Authority’s performance under the Neighborhood Stabilization Program was not stellar, but we believe we did a satisfactory job given the challenges of the program itself. Policies and procedures were not clear at the beginning of the program. The Dover Housing Authority worked very closely with City of Dover staff to complete program requirements and goals. 4. City Council was given a copy of a memo to the Dover Housing Authority’s Board of Commissioners summarizing complaints and accusations received by the Mayor and Kay Sass; we note there was no time period noted for when the accusations and complaints were received. My staff and I responded to all of the complaints listed at the time the City of Dover first brought them to our attention. The Dover Housing Authority must administer its public housing and Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program in accordance to federal regulations and the Delaware Landlord Tenant Code. The majority of the complaints are a result of enforcement of said regulations and code; with regard to the other complaints, we will be happy to address them, if requested. Following the Dover Housing Authority’s Board Meeting, I telephoned Ms. Sass to discuss the memo. I stated that I believed that the issues had been resolved at the time of the complaints; Ms. Sass stated that the memo was a compilation of complaints and accusations received by the City. Ms. Sass and Mayor Carey both had been given my cell phone number for direct communication with me, during the phone call, I again gave Ms. Sass my cell number.

The Dover Housing Authority believes that it is not a matter of competence, but a matter of understanding that enforcement of rules, regulations, and policies will result in dissatisfied applicants and residents of our programs if the result is not as they expected. Thank you for the opportunity to submit our request. We sincerely and humbly hope that the City of Dover will approve our request so we may proceed with our plans to improve our public housing units and developments.

ATTACHMENT #3 LF&A Committee Meeting of 05/27/2014