COUNCIL PACKET

REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA APRIL 9, 2018 - 7:30 P.M. CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 15 LOOCKERMAN PLAZA DOVER, DELAWARE OPEN FORUM - 30 MINUTES PRIOR TO OFFICIAL MEETING (7:00 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. C OUNCIL 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 C OUNCIL. 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 MARCH 26, 2018 2. PRESENTATIONS A. DOVER AIR FORCE BASE - AIR FORCE COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIP (AFCP) PROFILES IN PARTNERSHIP RECOGNITION AWARD (COLONEL GRIFFIN) B. MAYOR'S SELECTION FOR THE JEFFERSON AWARDS LEAD360 CHALLENGE C. ANNUAL ENGINEERING CONSULTANT'S REPORT ON THE OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF THE ELECTRIC SYSTEM - FISCAL YEAR 2017 3. PROCLAMATION - ARBOR DAY

COUNCIL AGENDA - APRIL 9, 2018 PAGE 2 4. POSTPONEMENT OF PUBLIC HEARING/FINAL READING OF PROPOSED ORDINANCE #2018-01 THE FIRST READING OF THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE WAS ACCOMPLISHED DURING THE COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 26, 2018. THE ORDINANCE IS AVAILABLE AT THE ENTRANCE OF THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS AND ON THE CITY'S WEBSITE AT WWW.CITYOFDOVER.COM UNDER "GOVERNMENT." THIS ITEM WAS TABLED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND STAFF RECOMMENDS POSTPONING THE PUBLIC HEARING/FINAL READING INDEFINITELY. A. AMENDING CHAPTER 66 - MANUFACTURED HOMES, MOBILE HOMES, AND LAND LEASE COMMUNITIES; APPENDIX B - ZONING, ARTICLE 3 - DISTRICT REGULATIONS, SECTION 8 - MANUFACTURED HOUSING (MH) ZONE; APPENDIX B - ZONING, ARTICLE 12 - DEFINITIONS; AND APPENDIX F - FEES AND FINES * 5. COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE REPORT - MARCH 27, 2018 A. SAFETY ADVISORY AND TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE (1) PRESENTATION BY THE DOVER/KENT COUNTY METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION (MPO) - FINAL REPORT OF THE DOWNTOWN DOVER PARKING STUDY (COMMITTEE RECOMMENDED ACCEPTANCE OF THE REPORT) (2) BRIEFING ON DOVER/KENT COUNTY METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION (MPO) PROJECTS (COMMITTEE ACTION NOT REQUIRED) (3) UPDATE - SAFETY ISSUES AT THE LIBRARY (COMMITTEE DEFERRED CONSIDERATION OF THIS MATTER) B. UTILITY COMMITTEE (1) PRESENTATION - ELECTRIC RATE DESIGN AND COST OF SERVICES STUDY (COMMITTEE ACTION NOT REQUIRED) (2) ROJAN MEADOWS SANITARY SEWER TERRITORY TRANSFERENCE (COMMITTEE RECOMMENDED GRANTING CONDITIONAL APPROVAL TO TRANSFER THE ROJAN MEADOWS SANITARY SEWER TERRITORY TO KENT COUNTY PENDING THE DEVELOPER'S ABILITY TO OBTAIN ALL NECESSARY APPROVALS AND AUTHORIZATIONS AS REQUIRED BY THE CITY) C. LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE (1) STATUS OF OTHER POST-EMPLOYMENT BENEFITS (OPEB) AND PENSION FUNDS (COMMITTEE ACTION NOT REQUIRED) (2) PROJECT CARRY-FORWARD BUDGET BALANCES AND PROPOSED ORDINANCE #2018-02 - FY 2017-2018 BUDGET ORDINANCES - FIRST AMENDMENT (COMMITTEE RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED BUDGET AMENDMENTS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2018 AND ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE #2018-02) (SEE ITEM #7-A) (3) GRANT APPLICATION PROCEDURE REVISIONS (COMMITTEE RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF THE PROCEDURE REVISIONS AS REQUESTED) (4) DIVERSITY AND INCLUSION STUDY REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (RFP) (COMMITTEE RECOMMENDED AUTHORIZING FUNDING UP TO $97,400 TO SUPPORT THE FULL SCOPE OF THE RFP)

COUNCIL AGENDA - APRIL 9, 2018 PAGE 3 * 6. MONTHLY REPORTS - FEBRUARY 2018 A. CITY ASSESSOR’S REPORT B. CITY COUNCIL’S COMMUNITY ENHANCEMENT FUND REPORT C. CITY MANAGER’S REPORT D. CITY PLANNER’S REPORT E. CONTROLLER/TREASURER’S BUDGET REPORT F. POLICE CHIEF’S REPORT 7. FIRST READING - PROPOSED ORDINANCE #2018-02 THE FIRST READING IS OFFERED ON THE P ROPOSED ORDINANCE. FINAL ACTION BY COUNCIL WILL TAKE PLACE DURING THE SECOND READING ON A PRIL 23, 2018. THE ORDINANCE IS AVAILABLE AT THE ENTRANCE OF THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS, ON THE CITY'S WEBSITE AT WWW.CITYOFDOVER.COM UNDER "GOVERNMENT," OR BY CONTACTING THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE AT 736-7008 OR CITYCLERK@DOVER.DE.US. A. FY 2017-2018 BUDGET ORDINANCES - FIRST AMENDMENT (LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE) 8. CITY MANAGER’S ANNOUNCEMENTS 9. COUNCIL MEMBERS’ ANNOUNCEMENTS 10. ADJOURNMENT /TM S:\AGENDAS-MINUTES-PACKETS-PRESENTATIONS-ATT&EXH\C OUNCIL-P ACKETS\2018\04-09-2018\ORIGINALS\04-09-2018 COUNCIL AGENDA. WPD EXECUTIVE SESSION PURSUANT TO: 29 DEL. C. §10004(B)(2) - PRELIMINARY DISCUSSIONS ON SITE ACQUISITIONS FOR ANY PUBLICLY FUNDED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS, OR SALES OR LEASES OF REAL PROPERTY; 29 DEL. C. §10004(B)(4) - STRATEGY SESSIONS, INCLUDING THOSE INVOLVING LEGAL ADVICE OR OPINION FROM AN ATTORNEY- AT- LAW , WITH RESPECT TO COLLECTIVE BARGAINING OR PENDING OR POTENTIAL LITIGATION, BUT ONLY WHEN AN OPEN MEETING WOULD HAVE AN ADVERSE EFFECT ON THE BARGAINING OR LITIGATION POSITION OF THE PUBLIC BODY; 29 DEL. C. §10004(B)(6) - DISCUSSION OF THE CONTENT OF DOCUMENTS, EXCLUDED FROM THE DEFINITION OF "PUBLIC RECORD" IN §10002 OF THIS TITLE WHERE SUCH DISCUSSION MAY DISCLOSE THE CONTENTS OF SUCH DOCUMENTS; 29 DEL. C. §10004(B)(9) - PERSONNEL MATTERS IN WHICH THE NA MES, COMPETENCY AND ABILITIES OF INDIVIDUAL EMPLOYEES ARE DISCUSSED, UNLESS THE EMPLOYEE REQUESTS THAT SUCH A MEETING BE OPEN THE AGENDA ITEMS AS LISTED MAY NOT BE CONSIDERED IN SEQUENCE. PURSUANT TO 29 DEL. C. §10004(E)(2), THIS AGENDA IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE TO INCLUDE THE ADDITION OR THE DELETION OF ITEMS, INCLUDING EXECUTIVE SESSIONS, WHICH ARISE AT THE TIME OF THE MEETING.

REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING The Regular Council Meeting was held on March 26, 2018 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. Polce, Mr. Hare, and Mr. Lindell. Staff members present were Police Chief Mailey, Ms. Peddicord, Mrs. Mitchell, Mr. Hugg, Deputy Fire Chief Rhodes, City Solicitor Rodriguez, and Mrs. McDowell. Mayor Christiansen was also present. OPEN FORUM The Open Forum was held at 7:00 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. Mr. Albert Evans, 101 Babb Drive, expressed concerns regarding dogs being loose in cars, public standards of decency in dress, and misuse of designated handicapped parking. The invocation was given by Bishop Thomas L. Holsey, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. AGENDA ADDITIONS/DELETIONS Mr. Hare moved for approval of the agenda, seconded by Mr. Neil and unanimously carried. Mr. Sudler requested that item #3-B(3) - Proposed Ordinance #2018-03 Amending the Dover Code of Ordinances by Creating a New Chapter 84 - Public Safety Fee, be removed from the Consent Agenda. Mr. Neil moved for approval of the Consent Agenda, as amended, seconded by Mr. Lewis and carried by a unanimous roll call vote. ADOPTION OF MINUTES - SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 12, 2018 The Minutes of the Special Council Meeting of March 12, 2018 were unanimously approved by motion of Mr. Neil, seconded by Mr. Lewis and bore the written approval of Mayor Christiansen. ADOPTION OF MINUTES - REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 12, 2018 The Minutes of the Regular Council Meeting of March 12, 2018 were unanimously approved by motion of Mr. Neil, seconded by Mr. Lewis and bore the written approval of Mayor Christiansen. ECO NO MIC D E V E L O P M E N T C O M M I T T E E R E PO RT - FEBRUARY 28, 2018 The Economic Development Committee met on February 28, 2018 with Mayor Christiansen presiding. AGENDA ADDITIONS/DELETIONS Due to the lack of a quorum, the agenda was not adopted.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 26, 2018 PAGE 2 Mayor Christiansen stated that the meeting would be informational only and no action would be required. Wilmington Unive rsity Contribution for Economic De ve lopment (Dr. Clinton Robertson) Dr. Clinton Robertson, Assistant Dean and Professor, College of Business, Wilmington University, advised members that he had been at Wilmington University as a full-time employee for 22 years following his employment as an engineer with Dupont. Ms. Jean Davis, Assistant Professor and Regional Chair, College of Business, Wilmington University, stated that she had approximately 30 years of accounting experience, is a Certified Public Account (CPA), and had been with Wilmington University approximately 10 years. Dr. Robertson stated that Wilmington University had met with Mayor Christiansen several times to discuss opportunities for cooperative efforts and partnerships for economic development with the City of Dover and Kent County. He advised that a meeting was held last week to brainstorm ideas and was attended by himself; Ms. Davis; Mayor Christiansen; Dr. Don Stuhlman, Wilmington University, Chair, Finance Programs; Mr. Mike Karia, Chair, Wilmington University, Adjunct Program Coordinator; Mr. Jim Waddington, Economic Development Director, Kent County Levy Court/Kent Economic Partnership; and Mr. Kirk Johnson, Professor of Economics, Goldey Beacom College. Dr. Robertson indicated that participants’ ideas quickly solidified regarding major industries and growth expected in Dover and Central Delaware, and he provided and reviewed a handout, entitled “Wilmington University Contribution for Economic Development”. Dr. Robertson indicated that the major industries in Delaware are food and restaurant, agriculture, healthcare services, and manufacturing. He explained that Wilmington University had recently been working with the Delaware Restaurant Association and noted that the food and restaurant business is the biggest employer in the State, with more than 500 restaurants and 50,000 employees. He indicated that they were looking at a number of training and educational programs to get into and had hired Mr. Van Hampton, a Wilmington University graduate and Executive Director, First State Community Loan Association, as a part-time adjunct instructor. Dr. Robertson stated that Mr. Clinton Tymes, Small Business Development Center, was working with Mr. Hampton. Dr. Robertson advised that there had been discussion regarding food service in downtown Dover, particularly Loockerman Street. He asked members what they would picture on Loockerman Street in three (3) to five (5) years, noting that millennials are drawn to bars and restaurants. Dr. Robertson stated that Delaware Technical and Community College (Del Tech) and Polytech have culinary arts facilities and, if they were pulled together with business and management programs, there could be a culinary institute at a place like the Loockerman Exchange. He advised that he went to upstate New York and saw how these culinary institutes work. Dr. Robertson stated that an institute in Canandaigua, New York shows

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 26, 2018 PAGE 3 students how to form a table and make preparations, and even has culinary retail outlets. He suggested that local colleges and universities could work together to do something new and innovative like this, noting that these institutions have articulation agreements but had never taken an active role in partnering to move ahead toward a common goal. Dr. Robertson informed members that healthcare had also been discussed, noting that this field was growing in the local area. He explained that the engine for growth was not just the increase in technology and healthcare but also demographics, since hundreds of retirees are moving into the area because of the taxes, climate, and great active adult communities. Dr. Robertson advised that he had been in this type of community for 17 years and it had drawn his neighbors from Pennsylvania, New York, and New Jersey. He noted that baby boomers would need healthcare, including long-term care, more and more. Dr. Robertson stated that Wilmington University has a nursing program and its business program offers a master’s in healthcare administration, which had been very popular, and a number of their graduates work at Bayhealth Medical Center. He indicated that Del Tech also has a nursing program and suggested that these programs could be pulled together for a united front for economic development in Dover and Kent County. Dr. Robertson advised that a number of manufacturing companies had left the area and it would be nice to have a concerted effort to bring manufacturing back. He stated that a good, educated, confident workforce is one (1) thing that would do this. Dr. Robertson noted that the Delaware Manufacturing Extension Partnership (DEMEP), formerly the Delaware Manufacturing Alliance, would be having an exposé in the area in a couple of weeks and expressed the desire to reconnect to see where education might fit in. He advised that Wilmington University has programs like project management, as well as a number of information systems and technology programs. Dr. Robertson explained that they also have a new and growing program in data analytics that involves analyzing different ways of putting together huge banks of data to see where opportunities might be. He stated that there is a need to look at where and in which types of jobs millennials will be working, and what those moving here to work in data centers would be looking for. Dr. Robertson noted that millennials are gregarious and like the idea of a central place for bars and restaurants, and a number of towns and cities are focusing on this in their downtown areas. He stated that there is also a need for jobs, noting that there was a question of whether jobs or this type of downtown activity would come first. Dr. Robertson stated that colleges and universities can bring data analysis and IT to Dover, online as well as in class, and get a feel for what the market is. He indicated that it would be nice if the City of Dover and the educational institutions could grow together. Dr. Robertson stated that another area of discussion was firefighters and police, noting that people come from everywhere to Dover to attend the Delaware State Fire School. He advised that Mayor Christiansen had mentioned that perhaps fire chiefs should have a terminal degree of some kind in management or business. Dr. Robertson informed members that Mr. Frank Richardson, a mutual friend of his

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 26, 2018 PAGE 4 and Mayor Christiansen’s who was once in charge of the Fire School, had worked as the head of the two-year fire and safety program at Del Tech. Dr. Robertson explained that Mr. Richardson had mentioned the possibility of having those who complete the Del Tech program come to Wilmington University to finish a bachelor’s or master’s degree program in fire and safety, while having Del Tech take care of everything. He stated that they had never really gotten into this new idea of cooperation among the different schools at this level. Dr. Robertson also advised that Wilmington University has a very dynamic program in administration of justice, which they had been looking at in regard to the police force and security in Dover. Dr. Robertson informed members that transportation is another field being discussed, noting that a short-line railroad operator had been mentioned because there are spurs off the Norfolk Southern line. He noted that the leasing of railroad lines was allowed after railroads were deregulated in1980. Responding to Dr. Robertson, Mr. Dave Hugg, Director of Planning and Community Development, stated that the Delaware Coast Line Railroad had taken over a lot of the short-haul traffic on the lower part of the Peninsula and could be seen regularly on the west side of Dover using those tracks. He advised that he did not know who their primary customers are, but the railroad is clearly a fixed investment that is grossly underutilized for freight and is not being utilized for potential passenger services. Referring to the air cargo ramp at Dover Air Force Base (DAFB) mentioned in the handout, Mr. Hugg stated that there had been a renewed effort by Mr. Waddington and a committee that is trying hard to get a use agreement signed, and things were starting to happen again at DAFB. Mr. Hugg informed members that a number of older industrial sites with great rail access were not being used, and there may be opportunities to use a site that had been developed and used for heavy activity as a freight transfer station or some other kind of railroading activity. He indicated that Dover is ideally situated to have a presence for both air and rail. Mr. Hugg stated that Mr. Waddington had discussed the logistics of civilian transportation in and out of DAFB and mentioned that cargo planes have to leave Dover and go to LaGuardia or JFK to be serviced and parked because they cannot be here for more than a specified number of hours. Mr. Hugg indicated that it would be great if there was local service and there was a lot of opportunity for growth in that area. Dr. Robertson stated that 24/7 availability of the runway is needed for air cargo. He advised that there are opportunities for freight because Dover is centrally located with Baltimore, Washington, New York, and Philadelphia. Dr. Robertson stated that he had heard that fresh flowers from South American were being pursued some years ago, noting that approximately 20 planes come into Miami International Airport per day and unload flowers. He explained that the flowers are placed in trailers and come all the way here for $1,400 per trailer, and he suggested the possibility of getting flowers closer and distributing them. Mr. Hugg indicated that a freight airline had been relaying fresh flowers from Miami to Dover using DAFB; however, they ran into the problem of not having anyplace to park or service the airplanes. He noted

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 26, 2018 PAGE 5 that planes have to fly to Dover, offload, and find somewhere to lay over until the flight back. Mr. Hugg advised that some pieces are missing and Dover could fulfill all those things. He stated that there are only one (1) or two (2) commercial or private jet servicing and rehabilitation companies in Delaware, including one (1) in New Castle County, and there is a huge market in private upscale commercial jets that have to be serviced, maintained, and rehabbed. Mr. Hugg noted that a friend who worked at the Greater Wilmington Airport for such a company advised that they were booked 24/7 and had a waiting list. Dr. Robertson stated that Wilmington University has a number of students from Pats Aircraft in Georgetown who rehab aircraft. Mayor Christiansen noted that Pats Aircraft rehabs planes for the Saudi royal family. Mr. Hudson advised that Keystone Helicopters in Chester County, Pennsylvania rehabs helicopters and had also made specialized helicopters for Saudi Arabian families. He stated that four (4) years ago this company was trying to expand to close to 3,000 jobs, having a very difficult time trying to find qualified people, and starting to pull people from the DC and Maryland areas to come to Chester County, Pennsylvania. Mr. Hudson advised that planes would be another market. Mr. Hudson informed members that there were culinary schools in Philadelphia that have school by day and sell the food they make to the public at night. He explained that they advertise their up-and-coming chefs and put out white tablecloths, and he stated his assumption that they were still doing well, noting that the community at- large wanted to help support them. Mr. Hudson suggested this as a possibility for Wilmington University and other schools at the Loockerman Exchange, noting that they could actually make money from people coming to eat and enjoy themselves. Ms. Davis noted that product sales would help with a lot of the costs. Mr. Hugg advised that the University of Delaware had done this successfully with their culinary program and had a fancy restaurant which was both a training and marketing opportunity. Mr. Hugg indicated that, in recent discussions, the owner of the Loockerman Exchange had mentioned offering a variety of foods, such as a sushi bar and a barbecue, noting that this type of setting is increasingly being sought by millennials. He explained that, during the Downtown Dover Partnership (DDP) meeting of February 28, 2018, there had been discussion about how to make downtown Dover different. He suggested that one (1) way to do so would be to make it a foodie heaven and encourage a variety of small restaurants. Mr. Hugg noted that a block in New York may have 20 small restaurants, each with their own kind of specialty. He expressed his belief that there were real opportunities to take advantage of food innovation, from the standpoint of entrepreneurs ranging from those making jelly in their kitchens to those in farm-to-table enterprises. Mr. Hugg advised that there had been discussions about the potential for aquaponics or hydroponics in an urban location downtown because that area is a food desert with no places for people of modest income to get good and fresh foods. He stated that up-and-coming entrepreneurs need somebody to handhold and train them, noting that marketing

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 26, 2018 PAGE 6 requires a different skill set. Ms. Davis noted that this is where the bridge would come in with Wilmington University, which would teach entrepreneurs business skills. Mr. Hugg advised that a university in Glassboro, New Jersey, has a joint innovative kitchen program that provides hands-on teaching on how to write a marketing plan, distribute a product, etc. He noted that this interesting model provides a kitchen that allows students to make a product, such as strawberry jam, in some quantity and with some assurance of meeting health codes and also provides advice about such things as product label design. Dr. Robertson indicated that this program was like an incubator and he believed that it was called a build-out. Mr. Hugg stated that there are a lot of good business programs in the State but no one offers undergraduate and graduate level education aimed at public administration, and he was unsure if a degree in public administration is available. He noted that not all of those with bachelor’s degrees in business are necessarily ready to step into public administration and do it well. Ms. Davis advised that Wilmington University’s undergraduate degree is not in public administration but has something to do with government; however, they offer master’s degrees in management and public administration. She indicated that the numbers in this program had been dwindling a little and they may need to update it. Ms. Davis suggested that perhaps Wilmington University should meet with City staff who work in public administration to see what they are missing and promote their program better. Mr. Hugg stated that the University of Delaware has an Institute for Public Administration that is focused largely on non-profit management and is not really preparing the next crop of managers that is needed. He advised that the International City Managers Association did some analysis not long ago on the graying face of city managers and concluded that more and more communities will be unable to find managers with any kind of focused training. He recalled that at one time there were a couple of thousand vacant city manager jobs across the country, and towns had been looking for years to fill them. Dr. Robertson stated that the time might be right for an advisory board in Dover, and Wilmington University would welcome the City’s participation. Ms. Davis advised that Wilmington University offers public administration classes for their master’s degree at DAFB and had also offered them in Georgetown and Dover, noting that perhaps they were not marketing this well. Mr. Hudson stated that, as a lot of the leadership in Delaware municipalities are getting older and retiring, people are being picked who may have on-the-job experience but not necessarily a degree. Ms. Davis expressed a desire to meet with staff to discuss Wilmington University’s courses. Ms. Davis asked if cities target individuals who have the ability to move up or if people with experience come from the outside. Responding, Mr. Hugg stated that

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 26, 2018 PAGE 7 many people come into this profession from the planning side, but a lot come out of the business environment and may or may not understand some of the subtleties. Mr. Hudson stated that many job announcements for city managers or assistant city managers indicate that they are looking for advanced degrees. He advised that the field is starting to understand that it is okay to have book knowledge; however, those with worldly experience in conjunction with what they have learned will do a lot better. Dr. Robertson stated that he would like to meet with Mr. Hugg and Mr. Hudson in the next couple of months to discuss public administration and perhaps some ideas to develop a city manager. Responding to Mr. Hudson, Ms. Davis stated that Wilmington University offers the face-to-face classes for the public administration program only at DAFB, noting that their numbers were dwindling a bit and there were only five (5) or six (6) students. She advised that their online programs were doing well. Dr. Robertson stated that the online program would not give students any practice interfacing with other people, as city managers and those in public administration must do. Mr. Hudson advised that those in resource professions must be able to deal with people, which can not be taught by a book, and must also have a personality that can deal with constant change. Dr. Robertson stated that Wilmington University had started to include internships and co-ops, which may be something they need to put into public administration. He noted that meeting with Mr. Hugg and Mr. Hudson as advisory staff would provide additional credibility for changing their program. Mr. Hugg stated that universities could be beneficial to the City in the areas of data analytics and understanding what is going on out in the real world on a longer-term basis. Mr. Hugg advised that retail business models of 10 years ago are outdated and there are many new permutations of how people conduct business, whether face-to-face, over the internet, or both. He indicated, for example, that everyone had been told that big supermarkets were the way to go; however, smaller 15,000 square foot supermarkets were having success because some customers want convenience and value pricing and do not care about brands. Mr. Hugg cited additional trends, including chains like Starbucks, online banking, and walk-in medical care. He stated that he struggles every day to keep up with the new marketing norms, and this is an area where value could potentially be added from the academic side, suggesting that graduate students could be assigned research projects such as tracking the evolution of how people eat or why Wawa is so successful. Mr. Hugg indicated that the City needs to understand this better to know how to manage land use in a changing environment. Ms. Davis stated that Wilmington University master’s degree and doctoral students write theses and dissertations and suggested that City staff could come up with ideas. She noted that they also offer internships and co-ops, and if students could be matched to the City’s needs, the University, the City, and the students would all win.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 26, 2018 PAGE 8 Mr. Hugg stated that he would like the University to open an ongoing dialog with the City due to the changing demographics. Mr. Hudson noted that the population in Delaware is changing, with many people coming from the northeast who are bringing or looking for changes and wanting to go somewhere small, quaint, and walkable. He stated that West Chester and Trolley Square in Wilmington are prime examples where there are new restaurants, eateries, and bars that are full all of the time. Dr. Robertson noted that a lot of people already live in these areas. Ms. Davis stated that Dover has a built-in clientele with the colleges in the area, noting that it is a college town without being a typical college town. Mr. Hugg stated that a couple thousand college students live two (2) blocks from the downtown area and never go there. He advised that Wilmington University students are largely driven by car, pass by the downtown area, and the City does not know what their preferences are. Dr. Robertson noted that there were challenges when W.T. Smithers was catering to students and State Street became rowdy at 1:00 a.m. Mr. Hugg explained that there are trade-offs, and understanding what they are is important. He stated that university students are an integral part of the community in Newark and are not in Dover and the question is why they are not. Mr. Hugg advised that it was not because the institutions offer many great things on campus. Mr. Hudson stated that Newark has a vibrant downtown, which Dover does not have but would like to have. He expressed the need for just one (1) big-name destination, like an Iron Hill Brewery, and advised that this was how West Chester started. Mr. Hudson indicated that Iron Hill took a chance, college students went, and the area started filling in overnight. He stated that Dover’s downtown is beautiful, much better than other downtown areas he had seen, and close to Route 13, and he could not understand why people were not coming in. Mr. Hudson noted that he lives in Wilmington and his friends there do not know where the downtown area in Dover is. He advised that the City’s administration had talked about signage, but there is really not a lot downtown when people drive there. Responding to Dr. Robertson, Mr. Hugg stated that there are incentives for downtown, such as waiving fees for building permits and business licenses, but it lacks a “wow.” He noted that there are a couple of dress shops, bars, etc., but not a restaurant row, entertainment strip, or boutique area. Mr. Hugg stated that a research project may be an opportunity to ask some of these questions. Ms. Davis suggested that perhaps they could survey the people and colleges in the area and ask what they would like to see and what would bring them downtown. Mr. Hugg explained there were four (4) new women’s boutiques downtown that seemed to stay open and in some places expand, but they are very much alone. He stated that he wondered how many of their customers are also buying a cup of coffee or lunch, and if they see their shopping experience as anything but a trip to a boutique.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 26, 2018 PAGE 9 Dr. Robertson stated that Wilmington University would like to partner with the City to help develop Dover and central Delaware. Mr. Hugg suggested that Wilmington University get involved with the Kent Economic Partnership, Greater Kent Committee, DDP, and the food innovation program that the County is running. He noted that a lot of serious energy is being spent and people are being asked to come and join. Mr. Hugg explained that the Greater Kent Committee is a very focused group of about 80 or 90 key business leaders and Kent County has organized a plant managers group for manufacturing- related businesses that meets periodically. Ms. Davis stated that Mr. Waddington had suggested that Wilmington University be part of the discussion and learn about it. Dr. Robertson noted that Wilmington University is also a stakeholder. Mr. Hugg stated that education is one of the major components in Dover’s economy but he was not sure that this is recognized or promoted well. He noted that the average person would not think of Dover as a center of education or higher education, as they may think of Newark and Wilmington, and collectively this message is not being sent. Ms. Davis stated that if Wilmington University can work with the City to find out what jobs are available in this area, they can train students who will stay here. By consent agenda, Mr. Neil moved for acceptance of the Economic Development Committee Report, seconded by Mr. Lewis and carried by a unanimous roll call vote. COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE REPORT - MARCH 13, 2018 The Council Committee of the Whole met on March 13, 2018 at 6:00 p.m., with Council President Slavin presiding. Members of Council present were Mr. Anderson (arrived at 6:28 p.m.), Mr. Sudler, Mr. Neil, Mr. Lewis, Mr. Cole, Mr. Polce (departed at 7:52 p.m. and returned at 7:53 p.m.), Mr. Hare (departed at 7:43 p.m.), and Mr. Lindell. Mayor Christiansen (departed at 7:41 p.m. and returned at 7:53 p.m.) was also present. Civilian members present for their Committee meetings were Mr. Caldwell and Dr. Warfield (Parks, Recreation, and Community Enhancement), Mrs. Doyle and Ms. Scarborough (Utility), and Mr. Shevock and Dr. Stewart (Legislative, Finance, and Administration). Mr. Hare moved to amend the agenda to change the order of the committees, as follows: Parks, Recreation, and Community Enhancement Committee; Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee; and Utility Committee. The motion was seconded by Mr. Sudler and unanimously carried.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 26, 2018 PAGE 10 PARKS, RECREATION, AND COMMUNITY ENHANCEMENT COMMITTEE The Parks, Recreation, and Community Enhancement Committee met with Chairman Sudler presiding. Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Application Review Mrs. Tracey Harvey, Planner/CDBG Administrator, reviewed her memo to the Parks, Recreation, and Community Enhancement Committee, dated March 13, 2018, regarding CDBG Grant Recommendations for FY 2018, as well as the FY 2018 CDBG Proposed Budget. Staff recommended approval of the proposed Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) allocation recommendations for the FY 2018 CDBG grant renewal fiscal year. The Committee recommended approval of staff’s recommendation. By consent agenda, Mr. Neil moved for approval of the Committe e’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Lewis and carried by a unanimous roll call vote. Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program Semi-Annual Update Mrs. Tracey Harvey, Planner/CDBG Administrator, reviewed the CDBG Semi- Annual Report, December 2017 - February 2018. LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE The Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee met with Chairman Hare presiding. AGENDA ADDITIONS/DELETIONS Mr. Hare moved to amend the agenda to consider item #7 - Proposed Ordinance #2018-03 Amending the Dover Code of Ordinances by Creating a New Chapter 84 - Public Safety Fee (Sponsors: Hare and Neil), following item #2 - Presentation - Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR). The motion was seconded by Mr. Lewis and unanimously carried. By unanimous consent, the agenda was approved as amended. Report of Independent Public Accountants for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2017 (CliftonLarsonAllen, LLP) On behalf of CliftonLarsonAllen, LLP, Mr. Bill Early, Principal, and Mr. Remi Omisore, Principal, reviewed a presentation entitled “City of Dover, Delaware, Audit Results, Year Ended June 30, 2017”. Staff recommended acceptance of the report.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 26, 2018 PAGE 11 Mr. Neil noted, for clarification to those audience members present, that this was not the first time that member’s of the Committee were receiving this information. He indicated that the report was included in the Committee meeting packet which was available on the City’s website. Mr. Neil stated that everything is transparent, explaining that if anyone ever wants to know what’s happening, they can go online and view the same material as members. Mr. Neil thanked Mr. Early and Mr. Omisore for their impressive report and members of staff for working with them so closely. Mr. Sudler asked Mr. Omisore to elaborate on his comment that expenses had decreased over the last couple of years. Responding, Mr. Omisore, referring to page 11, Income Statement Summary, of his presentation, explained that the expenses reflected are for the City as a whole and it is a combination of all of the funds. He stated that in looking at that $5M increase, the old accounting for Other Post- Employment Benefits (OPEB) standards related to how much you contributed to the trusts; however, when the new standard came into play, OPEB kind of smoothed out. Mr. Omisore advised that it is not a funding mechanism, it is more of an accounting mechanism of smoothing the expense across the plan. He stated that the best way to explain it is to compare your mortgage payment to the value of your home, explaining that if you bought a home for $400,000, the old standard only required you to record your monthly payment, but now the standard requires you to put the full value of your home, $400,000, and then you decrease those payments over the year. Mr. Omisore noted that it is more of a funding mechanism than a true expenses decreasing; unfortunately, when you see it in the financial statements, it’s hitting as an expense. He stated that it is difficult to compare apples to apples, but when you do that it looks like the expenses decreased. Mr. Omisore noted that there was also some reduction in budgeted expenses on the General Fund, which goes into that process as well. Mr. Early encouraged members to read Management’s Discussion and Analysis included the in Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR), noting that it is a very high-level, year-to-year comparison that provides more detail regarding the exact causes for fluctuations in expenditures and revenues. Mr. Sudler asked what the number one expense is for the City. Responding, Mr. Early stated that payroll is definitely the main expenditure. The Committee recommended acceptance of the report. By consent age nda, Mr. Neil moved for approval of the Committee’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Lewis and carried by a unanimous roll call vote. Presentation - Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) Mrs. Lori Peddicord, Controller/Treasurer, reviewed a presentation entitled “City of Dover, Comprehensive Annual Financial Report, Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2017”.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 26, 2018 PAGE 12 Staff recommended acceptance of the report. Mr. Anderson noted that the County Water/Wastewater was favorable by more than $400,000 and asked what the reason was for this. He asked if the County went down in their cost or if the City had other usage. Responding, Ms. Peddicord stated that the City may have budgeted higher than normal, expecting an increase in their fees. Mrs. Donna Mitchell, City Manager, stated that the City charged the Inflow and Infiltration (I & I) fee which helps offset the County treatment fees and that overage goes to capital projects for fixing the sewer mains. She explained that the City plans on the fact that the fee is going to be higher, noting that it has been budgeted that way for a while, and staff purposely looks for that extra to help pay the capital projects. Mr. Neil noted that Pump Station #7 (PS #7), located in the Third Council District, is still having problems and being worked on. He asked if the additional costs regarding those problems were yet known and included in these figures. Responding, Ms. Peddicord clarified that the CAFR information was for fiscal year 2017; therefore, those unexpected expenses were not reflected in this report. In response to Mr. Neil, she stated that she did have a budget amendment come through for fiscal year 2018; however, she did not know whether the City had received all of the bills in regard to the problem at PS #7 yet. The Committee recommended acceptance of the report. By consent agenda, Mr. Neil moved for approval of the Committee’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Lewis and carried by a unanimous roll call vote. Propose d Ordinance #2018-03 Amending the Dover Code of Ordinances by Creating a New Chapter 84 - Public Safety Fee (Sponsors: Hare and Neil) Mrs. Donna Mitchell, City Manager, reviewed a presentation entitled “City of Dover, Public Safety Fee,” and provided members with a list of owners of tax-exempt developed property, including the exterior square footage and sample fees and a list regarding public safety calls for 2016 - 2017. She reminded members that during the budget process in May of 2017 there was discussion among Council members regarding a public safety fee and, rather than try to put that into the budget at the last minute last year, she took some time to develop a public safety fee for mid-year consideration. Mrs. Mitchell explained that this would allow time for the Committee to vet the proposed ordinance, and if it is approved by Council, it would go into effect in July. She advised that one (1) of her goals in trying to get this out several months earlier than the budget process was to allow time to notify the entities that this would impact, and she also wanted to provide time to review all of the records and make sure they are reconciled. Mrs. Mitchell, referring to page 3 of the presentation, explained that the graph depicted the outlay and receipts for public safety expenses and revenues for governmental activities. She stated this graph was included in the budget and included all public safety. Mrs. Mitchell advised that public safety includes code

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 26, 2018 PAGE 13 enforcement, the Fire Marshal’s Office, police, and fire. She explained that to help offset that in the past, staff has shown the property taxes going toward these costs in the budget. Mrs. Mitchell, referring to page 8, Sample Comparison of Fees by Non-Profit Entity, of the presentation, advised that this was only a sample of the entities with the highest calculations and did not include all 95 entities, which is 135 properties. She advised that the presentation did not include information regarding the amounts the City currently receives in payment in lieu of taxes (PILOT) from some entities. Mrs. Mitchell noted that one (1) of the reasons the State of Delaware is not included in the sample and is exempt from the fee is because they make a formula-based PILOT to the City in accordance with State Code. She stated that Luther Towers was not included in the sample because they made a PILOT to the City in the amount of $31,828 in July 2017. She explained that, for example, based on a $.02 per square foot public safety fee, Luther Towers would have paid the City approximately $7,160. Mrs. Mitchell advised that the Delaware State Housing Authority currently pays the City approximately $13,000 per year and based on a $.02 per square foot fee they would pay $2,866. She stated that Dover Housing Authority is budgeted to pay the City $50,000 this year and based on a $.02 per square foot fee they would pay $6,114. Mrs. Mitchell noted that The Milford Housing Development Corporation is budgeted to pay the City $7,500 this year and they would pay $1,726, based on a $.02 per square foot fee. She explained that by using the square footage, the proposed public safety fee would equalize all nonprofits to be paying at the same rate. Staff recommended adoption of Proposed Ordinance #2018-03. Mr. Anderson thanked Mrs. Mitchell, noting that he thought that she did a thorough and comprehensive job on this assignment. He asked if the City would lose money if entities stopped making their PILOT and paid a $.01 per square foot fee. Responding, Mrs. Mitchell stated that yes, at $.01 per square foot, the City would not make as much as it currently makes based on what the four (4) entities pay in-lieu of taxes. Mr. Anderson stated that the City had done a lot to encourage economic development and asked if the proposed ordinance would be negative to organizations that had been partnering with the City to help in this regard. Mr. Anderson noted that organizations that provide affordable housing, such as Milford Housing and Habitat for Humanity, have to hold properties at least one (1) year to avoid the transitional cost. He asked if these types of organizations, including the new Dover housing, if it comes about, would pay a fee if they were to buy a property in order to improve it. He noted that these purchases benefit the City and provide a lot more tax money that if they were to pay a fee. Responding, Mrs. Mitchell stated that the fees for organizations, like Habitat, who build and sell houses are based on the Certificate of Occupancy when the house is built and the property assessment is done. She explained that such a property would not be on the records until it is finalized and the assessed value is taken through the Tax Assessor’s Office. Mrs. Mitchell advised that the bills are

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 26, 2018 PAGE 14 done quarterly and if they sold the house, they would never see the fee; however, if they have not sold that house, they would have a fee. She stated that the City provides a lot of economic development incentives through impact fee and permit waivers, and quite a few waivers had been provided over the past five (5) years. She explained that these waivers are tracked and the beneficiaries for the most part are NCALL, Habitat, and Milford Housing. Mr. Sudler asked Mrs. Mitchell whether she had considered a restriction or constraint on the proposed fee. He asked, for example, if she would recommend that the proposed $.02 or $.03 not exceed $.05 or $.10, which would deter nonprofit or 501(c)(3) organizations from coming to the City. Responding, Mrs. Mitchell stated that Council would decide the rate during the budget process and she was not currently recommending any particular rate, this was only a discussion of the ordinance and fee. She explained that she had used $.01 and $.02 as examples, noting that a $.01 fee would garner $72,000, while a $.02 fee would garner $144,000. Mrs. Mitchell reminded members that the fee would only help the City pay for the costs associated with fire and police capital items; it would not pay for all of those items at these levels. Mr. Sudler suggested that members reach out to their State officials to get some input and see how it may affect constituents or 501(c)(3) business partners. Mr. Lindell asked what the exact amount of money is that the City offers in total incentives for the various groups. Responding, Mrs. Mitchell stated that in the downtown district the City offered or waived fees in the amount of $21,811 in FY 17 and $61,545 in FY 16. She advised that there was also commercial development which amounted to $39,252 in FY 16 and $1,000 in FY 17. In response to Mr. Sudler’s suggestion that members reach out to their State legislators, Mr. Hare stated that he had been reaching out to the legislators for the past two (2) to three (3) years and it was obvious to him that the City of Dover was not treated the same as the City of Wilmington at Legislative Hall. He explained that the State distributes $3M to the three county seats, Georgetown, Dover, and Wilmington, and the City of Dover has approximately $275M worth of State properties that are exempt and receives $300,000, while the City of Wilmington has $175M worth of exempt property and receives $2.6M. Mr. Hare indicated that there was a caveat that they get more for less property because they have 50,000 people. He noted that the City of Wilmington also has a city wage tax but the State will not approve a wage tax for the City of Dover. Mr. Hare stated that he agrees that everyone should reach out to the legislature because there is obviously discrimination between Wilmington, Dover, Georgetown, and even Newark. Ms. Judy Diogo, President, Central Delaware Chamber of Commerce (CDCC), stated that, since the public safety fee was announced, the CDCC had received a number of phone calls from nonprofits with concerns that there was a lack of information leading up to the discussion of a public safety fee. She advised that they were trying to figure out if the fee was about equity or need, noting that, from the information

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 26, 2018 PAGE 15 that they had heard at the meeting, it appeared that the reason for the fee was need. Ms. Diogo expressed concern that there were no examples of the rate in the ordinance, leading people to jump to conclusions, and she thanked Mrs. Mitchell for the list of owners of tax-exempt developed property, including the exterior square footage and sample fees, that was provided, which made it clearer and helped a great deal. Ms. Diogo advised that a lot of nonprofits took hits at Legislative Hall last year and were still anticipating budget cuts. She recommended, on behalf of the CDCC’s nonprofits, that the City meet with groups who will be impacted by this particular fee in a huge way. Referring to list of owners of tax-exempt developed property, including the exterior square footage and sample fees, Ms. Diogo noted that the highest fee listed at the $.01 per square foot rate was approximately $19,500 and the lowest was $10.54. She asked if there was a possibility of looking at the situations of organizations with higher fees, such as those ranging from $1,000 to $19,500. Ms. Diogo noted that these organizations are already paying fees to the City for water, electricity, etc., and suggested consideration of a different rate for some of the larger users. Ms. Diogo noted that consideration was being given to implementing the proposed ordinance in April and starting billing in July. She requested, if it absolutely had to be done, that Council set the rate at $.01 per square foot, with a caveat that this would last for three (3) to five (5) years so that nonprofits can plan their budgets. Ms. Diogo asked that the City hold public workshops after this initial period to find out the fee’s impact on nonprofit organizations. She stated that the impact is a missing piece of the puzzle, and she expressed the need to remember that nonprofits are providing services that the government cannot pay for. Ms. Carolyn Fredericks, Modern Maturity Center (MMC), stated that she had called almost all members of Council and expressed thanks for the calls back that she received. She asked members what they considered the value of the MMC to the City, noting that they have paid $188,000 in utilities to the City, and do not receive any type of discount for the services they provide to residents. She noted that her counterpart in Newark had advised that the City of Newark provides Newark Senior Center a credit of $60,000 on their electric bill, which would be really nice for the MMC to receive. Ms. Fredericks stated that the MMC provided 133,000 Meals on Wheels to shut-in residents, just in the Dover area, at a value of $1.1M. She explained that Meals on Wheels is not all paid for by the State or Federal government and the MMC had to supplement that funding by approximately $100,000. Ms. Fredericks informed members that 55-plus communities are tax paying and are locating to Dover in droves. She stated that The Grande, which bought the property adjacent to the MMC and is a big taxpayer, had just added another building. Ms. Fredericks reminded members that years ago the City provided the Senior Surrey for transportation but now the MMC provides transportation.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 26, 2018 PAGE 16 Ms. Fredericks stated that nonprofits had experienced a 20% cut in State funds and, even with those cuts, worked diligently not to reduce the services that they provide to their clients. She advised that the City had never provided any funding to the MMC, and the organization had not gotten any breaks on building or other fees. She noted that they had not received any breaks on the building permit for their current building program and were just assessed an impact fee of $6,000 for one (1) hand sink and one (1) floor drain. Ms. Fredericks advised members that the MMC has provided a social environment and services for older adults for almost 50 years, which makes Dover a great place to live and retire. Mr. Sudler thanked Ms. Fredericks for reaching out to him and educating him about her position and continuing to educate members about the MMC’s services and what they have and have not received. Ms. Jeanine Kleimo, Chair, Dover Interfaith Mission for Housing (DIMH), stated that, in addition to the points that had already been made, DIMH had already submitted proposals for funding for the program year that will begin in July, so they had not had an opportunity to budget for any increase. She noted that costs are rising, but funding is absolutely not rising. Ms. Kleimo informed members that DIMH has brought homeless people off of the streets and made Dover safer as a result. She stated that this should not result in being charged fees for the services that they receive, noting that DIMH is a net contributor to public safety. Ms. Kleimo stated that DIMH puts approximately $3.5M every year into the local economy in terms of the wages generated by their clients that are hired by local employers, which is more than 10 times their budget and is a part of the economic development of the community of Dover. She asked members to consider the impact of this and other ways to engage with those working with disadvantaged populations to increase public safety in a way that does not cost them more money. Ms. Mamie Charest, Executive Director, People’s Place, requested that members not move forward with the proposed fee. She explained that People’s Place had served Delaware’s most vulnerable population for over 45 years. Ms. Charest advised that their Whatcoat Program is the largest homeless shelter in Dover and the only one that provides shelter for families. She stated that Whatcoat sheltered 417 adults and children and provided 13,500 nights of shelter in 2017, and the agency serves one- third of the homeless population in the State. Ms. Charest indicated that without their program people would be on the streets, and there would be an impact to the City in other ways. She expressed her belief that this fee would be pushed to the first responders in the City, noting that Whatcoat appreciates these responders very much but wants to work in partnership with them. Ms. Charest stated that last year was a very hard year for People’s Place and they received a 20% cut, which meant that their Whatcoat Program, through which they provide homeless shelter, is running at a large deficit. She explained that they had continued to operate that program as a good faith effort, knowing that they are doing

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 26, 2018 PAGE 17 good in the community. Ms. Charest asked members not to push the proposed ordinance forward. Mr. Robert Clark II, President, Wesley College, noted that he would not repeat the things that other individuals had stated. He stated that he acknowledged the support and partnership that Wesley College had enjoyed with the City, County, and State. Mr. Clark advised that Wesley College views itself as Dover’s, Kent County’s, and Delaware’s college that shares the privilege of educating and mentoring the future with other institutions of higher learning in this area. He indicated that Wesley is very proud of the education and opportunities they provide their students that will enable them to be catalysts of positive change in the region. Mr. Clark stated that he had been amazed that, since he became a member of the community, he could not go far without finding a Wesley alumnus who had impacted the culture, leadership, and future of the region and State, which he stated was Wesley’s worth. Mr. Clark stated that he thought that the current discussion was not so much about “do we or don’t we” but about a coming together of the community and finding a partnership that works for moving it forward. He expressed the need to find something that is informed and collaborative, where various stakeholders work together to find out the short- and long-term implications and possible solutions. Mr. Clark stated that he thought it was important to gain perspective by finding out what other communities do, noting that Dover is not the only city facing this challenge. He advised that Ms. Fredericks had made an excellent point and that the proposal was very focused on tax. Mr. Clark stated that, if members are looking at need and who provides relief, they must look across the board at community service, utilities, water, and the impact if an entity leaves. He indicated that he did not think there had been that type of discussion, noting that he just found out about the proposal a few days ago. Mr. Clark advised that he could not provide a recommendation until he had time to look at the problem and all of the options from an informed standpoint, and come together with a solution. He expressed concern that, in reading the newspaper, he saw things that inferred a lack of contribution by Wesley and others in the room, noting that he knew that was not intended but was how it read. Mr. Clark asked members to look at the jobs that are provided and the monies put forth. He stated that he was unsure whether what the City was trying to do was aligned with 9 Delaware Code, Section 8105. Mr. Clark requested that, before moving forward, everyone get together and perhaps form a group representative of those present, take a look at the realm of possibilities across the board, and find the right equity that will meet the needs for the near and long term. Mr. Clark advised that nonprofits of any sort, whether for education, healthcare, or any of the things that serve the community, are one (1) team and family, with one (1) collective future, and all their voices and efforts are needed to help see this matter through. Responding to Mr. Anderson, Mr. Clark explained that 9 Delaware Code, Section 8105 addresses some of the things being looked at. He stated that Section 8105

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 26, 2018 PAGE 18 referred to the legalities and expressed the need to focus on potential solutions and make sure there is informed input. Ms. Valerie Swayze, Delaware Agricultural Museum, stated that she was speaking as a citizen who was born and raised in Dover and her comments did not apply to the Museum. She explained that she, the director, and Museum staff had seen an article in the newspaper regarding the proposed public safety fee earlier in the day. Ms. Swayze advised that the proposed fee would not apply to the Delaware Agricultural Museum; however, this did not mean that it would not in the future. She noted that the Museum leases its property from Delaware State University and when she saw the amount of approximately $19,000 for the University, she thought that the Museum would have to find a way to come up with the money. Ms. Swayze explained that the Delaware Agricultural Museum is one (1) of the only museums not funded by the State. She noted that they did take a cut like other nonprofits did. Ms. Swayze stated that she asks herself how the Museum can continue to do what they do when they receive a $4,000 per month gas bill or $3,000 electric bill. She explained that they see more than 100,000 kids per year from New Castle, New Jersey, Maryland, etc. Ms. Swayze stated that most museums in Delaware are free; however, the Delaware Agricultural Museum charges admission because they have to. She indicated that she had worked in budget and finance and that there have to be other ways, and she asked that everyone work together and look. Ms. Swayze noted that one (1) or two (2) pennies were currently being discussed; however, she guaranteed that before long it would be more. Ms. Melissa Hopkins, Vice President of Sector Advancement, Delaware Alliance for Nonprofit Advancement (DANA), advised that DANA is a statewide membership organization for nonprofits in Delaware and their goal is to advance the nonprofit sector through advocacy, training, capacity-building, and research. Ms. Hopkins stated that DANA had concerns regarding the legality of the proposed legislation. She stated that, as previously stated, 9 Delaware Code, Section 8105 states “Corporations created for charitable purposes and not held by way of investment that are in existence on July 14, 1988, together with existing and future charitable affiliates of such corporations that are also not held by way of investment, shall not be liable to taxation and assessment for public purposes by any county, municipality, or other political subdivision of this State.” Ms. Hopkins stated that charitable nonprofits are exempt from this kind of statute and encouraged members to look into this further. In addition, she advised that the rationale behind the tax is that fire and police resources are insufficient, which she could appreciate; however, she thought there was not enough evidence to link the insufficiency of capacity at the Police and Fire Departments to the actions of nonprofits in the City of Dover. Ms. Hopkins questioned whether there was data showing a link between charitable organizations and insufficiencies in these agencies, because otherwise it felt as though the City was demanding a special payment from nonprofit organizations, which she thought was a question of equality.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 26, 2018 PAGE 19 Ms. Hopkins noted that nonprofit organizations in the City want to partner with Dover’s police and fire organizations and requested consideration of how nonprofits are making it easier for law enforcement to do the job that they are intended to do. She noted that DANA’s organizations in the City and statewide are serving homeless populations, feeding the hungry, serving the mentally ill, and serving as community safe spaces for children and teens. Ms. Hopkins cautioned members that the additional expense of one (1) or two (2) pennies being discussed did not seem like much, but does add up and will impact services offered in the City. Ms. Hopkins expressed concern regarding the fee amount and collection process outlined in the legislation. She stated that the fee amount is not really clear, noting that the proposed ordinance states that, “The public safety fee amount and collection process will be examined by the city manager and city council annually during the budget formulation process...The city council will set and adopt the public safety fee amount....” Ms. Hopkins noted that it indicates that if revenues are insufficient to properly operate the public safety department, Council may need to reevaluate. She expressed concern that the language was shifting and that operational expenses were being discussed, versus capital funds, which she thought the proposed ordinance was really intended to serve, and suggested that this language be clarified. Ms. Hopkins stated that nonprofits in Delaware and in the City really want to be a partner to the City’s police and fire organizations, and she expressed her hope that members continue to allow them to do what they do well and serve the City of Dover. Mr. William Garfinkel, Bicentennial Village, congratulated members for bringing forth the proposed ordinance, stating that it was time for exempt corporations that use City services to pay their fair share, and there should be no more cost-shifting to homeowners and small businesses. He advised that the proposal was not something new, noting that federal credit unions are exempt from income tax but are required to pay county and municipal property taxes by federal law, and they had been paying ever since the credit union movement began. Mr. Garfinkel stated that it was only fair that other exempt properties start paying their fair share. He requested, on behalf of himself as a taxpayer and other taxpayers in the City, that members stay the course and pass the proposed ordinance. Mr. Sudler moved to recommend that, due to the sentiment of the majority of the individuals present, the City not move forward with Proposed Ordinance #2018-03 until further discussion with the stakeholders and the legality of the matter has been clarified in lieu of evading legal ramifications. The motion was seconded by Mr. Anderson. Mr. Slavin asked that members not make negative motions because members would be voting yes for the process to close, which had proved very confusing in the past. Mr. Slavin expressed appreciation for the input received, noting that where members are currently and where they will be when legislation is eventually enacted are two (2) different places, and this is the nature of creating legislation. He advised that he

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 26, 2018 PAGE 20 considered the legislation to be organic and noted that it was not something that Council drummed up but came from numerous meetings that members attend with homeowners and neighborhood associations. Mr. Slavin explained that there had been a clarion call from people who were wondering why their real estate taxes offset services for people who do not pay taxes, and he could not defend it. He indicated that maybe those present and some of the things he had heard could help him create a defensible position; however, there is a principle of fairness that must be addressed. Mr. Slavin explained that, while good, honest, and ethical non-for-profits were currently being represented, there were also not-for-profits who clearly operate outside of their stated mission. He advised that they operate bars, campgrounds, and RV parking lots and sell cars on their property, which is not what they are chartered to do, and he expressed the need to tighten this up. Mr. Slavin suggested rewording the motion, if the maker was amenable, to have the City Manager provide analysis of some of the ideas that had been heard, continue the dialogue, and bring forward an amended ordinance based on these ideas in one (1) month at the April meeting of the Committee. Mr. Sudler indicated that his intent was to have further discussion with the community before bringing this matter back to Council or the Committee and did not think that one (1) month would allow enough time. Mr. Slavin advised that the one-month suggestion was meant only as a marker so that members would have a report in a month’s time. Mayor Christiansen yielded to Mr. Lindell, noting that this was a meeting of the Council Committee of the Whole. Mr. Lindell stated that he supported the one- month delay proposed by Mr. Slavin, noting that this was an arbitrary number that could be changed. He stated that this time frame would be reasonable to get the conversation started and if the process was not complete the matter could be moved to another agenda, as had been done previously. Mr. Hare noted that he would not be available for the second Committee meeting in April. Responding to Mr. Hare, Mr. Sudler stated that he would be amenable to amending the motion to state six (6) weeks, and Mr. Anderson concurred stating that one (1) month was not enough time. Mr. Slavin suggested that the motion be withdrawn and restated as a positive motion with a six-week time frame. Mr. Lindell called the question. The motion to recommend that, due to the sentiment of the majority of the individuals present, the City not move forward with Proposed Ordinance #2018-03 until further discussion with the stakeholders and the legality of the matter has been clarified in lieu of evading legal ramifications was withdrawn by Mr. Sudler and Mr. Anderson. Mr. Sudler moved to recommend bringing this matter back for discussion in six (6) weeks, seconded by Mr. Anderson.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 26, 2018 PAGE 21 Mr. Sudler advised that his original motion had included further discussion with the community. Mr. Hare stated that it would be up to members to go out and talk to people. Mr. Sudler stated that he was more amenable to the City Manager having a meeting with the community. Mr. Lindell advised that he had called the question on Mr. Sudler’s original motion. Mr. Anderson stated, as a point of order, that Mr. Lindell’s motion was not recognized and was irrelevant. Mr. Hare stated that there was a motion and a second and the matter was still open for discussion. Mayor Christiansen raised a point of order, noting that, as a matter of courtesy, he had yielded to Mr. Lindell. Mayor Christiansen suggested that he and the City Manager meet with those who are interested and bring information back to Council in a timely manner, in the interest of bettering the City’s communications. Mr. Hare stated that he would also make himself available if his schedule permitted. Mr. Anderson stated that he felt the discussion should be held; however, he was unsure if there was a fix because members were ignoring that money is brought in by some of the nonprofits. He explained, for example, that Restoring Central Dover and the National Council on Life and Labor Research (NCALL) had brought in a grant to help with lighting project demonstrations. Mr. Anderson advised that this grant alone was for more than the amount that they would pay for the next 10 years under the proposed ordinance. He stated that Restoring Central Dover grants had amounted to more than $0.5M for the community and this had to be taken into account. Mr. Anderson advised that many demolitions that would have cost the City $15,000 - $30,000 apiece had been done by Habitat for Humanity, NCALL, and Milford Housing, saving the City well over $100,000. He stated that nonprofits are bringing in a lot of money through partnering with the City, and he expressed the need to look at the issue comprehensively, not just based on the small amount the City is losing but also on how much the nonprofits are bringing. Mr. Anderson expressed the need to ask questions, such as how much Wesley College’s security footprint downtown saves the City. He noted that Wesley’s security provides an extra set of eyes not just on campus but from Pear Street through State Street, and the comprehensive picture is a lot more than $144,000. He noted that he would like to see a legal opinion on this matter before the six-week period is over to see if it the proposal is legally defensible and if members should spend time on it. Mr. Hare informed members that the City has one of the best police departments in the State. He noted that the Dover Fire Department is also one of the best and has an insurance rating of two (2) because, as a non-paid fire department, they are not allowed to be number one (1). Mr. Hare noted that the Dover Fire Department’s response time in the past had been quicker than the Wilmington Fire Department’s. He advised that, when time, apparatus, etc., are included, the cost every time the

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 26, 2018 PAGE 22 alarm goes off and responders go out the door is a minimum of $500 to $1,000. Mr. Hare stated that there is also a cost whenever the police have a call. He advised that there had been 123 fire and police calls to Wesley College in the past two (2) years, 277 fire and police calls to Delaware State University, and 662 police and fire calls to Bayhealth and questioned the cost of these calls. Mr. Hare noted that, as Ms. Fredericks had stated, costs were going up. He questioned if members should advise constituents that their taxes would be raised to cover false alarms. Mr. Hare suggested the possibility of developing a set run fee for all fire alarms or police calls to a facility, and those who do not use the service would not pay for it. He stated that, as Mr. Anderson had advised, there may be some offsets to the costs; however, he did not think that the costs of close to 1,000 calls in two (2) years would be offset. Mr. Neil stated that he and many of his neighbors, who own homes in a leased land community and pay a lot rent, appreciate the MMC’s facilities and the services they provide. He explained that these same individuals had tried to purchase their homes but could not. Mr. Neil informed members that the company that bought the community’s land had decided they wanted more money and raised their rent by $40. He noted that they are entitled to $3.52 by the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U). Mr. Neil advised that, while the City is trying to bring in businesses, this money was now leaving Delaware’s economy and going to Michigan and, unfortunately, the State was also involved because they guaranteed them a profit and took away all of their risk. Mr. Neil expressed his belief that the City has an obligation and responsibility to protect students at the colleges as well as people who are in Delaware Housing Authority housing, Dover Housing Authority housing, and at Bayhealth. He expressed his hope that taxpayers who are moving into homes created by Habitat are not subsidizing police and fire protection. Mr. Neil suggested seeing if the nonprofits could come up with some suggestions during the interim period and that having the legal questions answered, noting that by that time members would be ready for a discussion about resolving some of the problems without raising taxpayers’ payments. He noted that the PILOT program that Luther Towers had participated in may be an answer. Responding to Mr. Lindell, Mr. Hare stated that there was a motion on the floor to bring this matter back in six (6) weeks. Mr. Lindell called the question, seconded by Mr. Sudler and unanimously carried. The Committee recommended bringing this matter back for discussion in six (6) weeks.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 26, 2018 PAGE 23 Responding to Mayor Christiansen, Mr. Hare stated that, with the permission of Council, Mayor Christiansen and the City Manager could proceed with speaking to the aggrieved parties. During the Council meeting, Mr. Sudler asked what the process would be for Mayor Christiansen and Mrs. Donna Mitchell, City Manager, to retrieve and disseminate information in the community within the four (4) week timeline. Responding, Mayor Christiansen stated that a meeting will be held with all of the nonprofits who spoke at the Committee meeting or who have expressed an interest in participating. The meeting will be held either April 6th or April 12th in the Great Hall at St. Andrews Lutheran Church. Mayor Christiansen advised that the comments and suggestions gathered at the meeting will be presented to members of City Council. Mr. Sudler asked if a letter would be sent to the 95 nonprofit entities advising them of the meeting. Responding, Mayor Christiansen advised that Ms. Judy Diogo of the Central Delaware Chamber of Commerce will contact them to facilitate the meeting. Mr. Sudler asked if a legal opinion had been sought regarding 9 Delaware Code, Section 8105 for State Corporations Created for Charitable Purposes. Responding, Mrs. Mitchell advised that she had not yet contacted Deputy City Solicitor Pepper for an opinion. Mr. Anderson asked how much some of the larger charities, such as Bayhealth, Delaware State University, Wesley College, Wilmington College, and Delaware Tech, contribute with a payment in lieu of taxes (PILOT). Responding, Mr. Hare advised that none of the charities that Mr. Anderson mentioned pay or have paid a PILOT to the City. Mr. Anderson stated that there was some measure of concern, which will probably be discussed. He noted that there are other organizations that have contributed a great deal in partnership with the City and that he hoped that they would find a way of achieving a positive balance that does not punish the nonprofits but finds new ways to build partnerships. Mr. Hare suggested meeting with the five (5) larger nonprofit organizations and then deciding. He stated that it was his understanding that organizations that receive federal funding are required to give a PILOT, which is why the City receives a PILOT from Milford Housing Authority and Delaware State Housing Authority. Mayor Christiansen advised that they are attempting to facilitate a meeting with the larger nonprofit organizations. Mr. Hare suggested that the nonprofit organizations should be encouraged to contact their legislators, noting that Wilmington receives significantly more of the State’s payment in lieu of taxes (PILOT) allocation than Dover receives, although Wilmington has fewer tax-exempt properties. Mr. Sudler stated that he thought that all of the nonprofit organizations should have an opportunity to be heard and speaking with only the five (5) larger groups could give the appearance of exclusion. Mr. Sudler moved for approval of the Committee’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Neil and unanimously carried.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 26, 2018 PAGE 24 Status of Other Post-Employment Benefits (OPEB) and Pension Funds The Committee deferred consideration of this item, due to time constraints. Project Carry-Forward Budget Balances and Proposed Ordinance #2018-02 - FY 2017-2018 Budget Ordinances - First Amendment The Committee deferred consideration of this item, due to time constraints. Diversity and Inclusion Study Request for Proposal (RFP) The Committee deferred consideration of this item, due to time constraints. Ambulance Services Proposal Mrs. Donna Mitchell, City Manager, informed members that City staff issued a Request for Proposals (RFP #18-0010CM) on November 15, 2017 for Ambulance Services, with proposals to be received by December 19, 2017. Two (2) proposals were received from Mid-Atlantic Care, LLC and PrimeCare Medical Transport, LLC, the current provider. In completing the review of the current proposals, staff also reviewed their financial statements, the Center for Public Safety Management (CPSM) Report of March 2016, and previous City Council minutes pertaining to the Ambulance Services. She explained that she had several conversations with the City Fire Marshal, Mr. Jason Osika, and Mrs. Kay Sass to help her understand the services provided and the current contract. Mrs. Mitchell advised that her findings indicated that RFP #18-0010CM was not sent to national firms as recommended in the CPSM Report, and staff had not followed through on Council’s motion of May 22, 2015. Mrs. Mitchell explained that staff was requesting to re-issue the RFP with the understanding that the recommendations of the March 2016 Report will be included. She noted that staff would also like to form an Administrative Committee of Medical and Paraprofessionals to assist the City with development and review of Ambulance Service Proposals and future contracts. The Committee would be established by the City Manager and approved by the Safety Advisory and Transportation Committee. The City Manager would be the Committee Chair, and the Emergency Management Coordinator would serve on the Committee as well. Mrs. Mitchell advised that while the Mid-Atlantic Care, LLC proposal has a lower cost, staff has concerns with their ability to staff crews and provide ambulances with the current contract expiring on March 31. She noted that she did reach out to the CEO and COO to explain her concerns and let them know of the plans to reissue the RFP. Mrs. Mitchell stated that she had negotiated a six-month extension with PrimeCare Medical Transport, LLC, whose contract had a provision for two (2), one- year extensions. She explained that PrimeCare’s new proposal contained a rate increase and the City would absorb this increase for six (6) months. Mrs. Mitchell noted that the public safety risk is too great to change a contract without several months’ notice. She stated that a revised RFP will be drafted upon Council approval of the six-month extension of the current contract.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 26, 2018 PAGE 25 Staff recommended authorizing the City Manager to execute a six-month extension of the current contract with PrimeCare Medical Transport, LLC at the rates provided. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Mrs. Mitchell stated that the current provider’s proposed rate had increased from $40 to $45. She advised that there had been no rate increase over the three-year contract and she had agreed to absorb the rate increase for six (6) months while another RFP is issued. The Committee recommended approval of staff’s recommendation to authorize the City Manager to execute a six-month extension of the current contract with PrimeCare Medical Transport, LLC at the rates provided, re-issue the RFP with the understanding that the recommendations of the March 2016 Report will be included, and form an Administrative Committee of Medical and Paraprofessionals to assist the City with development and review of Ambulance Service Proposals and future contracts, with the Committee to be established by the City Manager and approved by the Safety Advisory and Transportation Committee. By consent agenda, Mr. Neil moved for approval of the Committee’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Lewis and carried by a unanimous roll call vote. UTILITY COMMITTEE The Utility Committee met with Chairman Cole presiding. Update - U.S. Route 13 East Pump Station #7 (PS #7) Emergency Response (Requested by Mr. Lewis) Mrs. Sharon Duca, Public Works Director/City Engineer, provided an update regarding the U.S. Route 13 East Pump Station #7 (PS #7) emergency response in relation to the sanitary sewer overflow that occurred at PS #7 on February 19, 2018. Mr. Lewis thanked Mrs. Duca and her staff for their due diligence in addressing this matter in an expeditious time frame, and asked if the City had any warranties on any of the related equipment. Responding, Mrs. Duca stated that some of the equipment was outside the time frame of a standard warranty and typical warranties would not cover the occurrence, due to the fact that the failure was related to the corrosive environment. Mr. Lewis asked if there was a proposed final cost yet. In response, Mrs. Duca explained that based on the costs that she had received so far, which included emergency hauling services, environmental services, bypass pumping, the materials to change out the station, as well as the new pump components which were ordered, they were looking at more than $200,000. She stated that she was still waiting for some final estimates, and that amount does not include future component change-out that staff would like to do once the air scrubber is in place and the environment is more controlled.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 26, 2018 PAGE 26 Mr. Lewis noted that the City was collaborating with the County on the air scrubber and asked what the status was in that regard. Responding, Mrs. Duca advised that the air scrubber had been ordered after Council had approved it and, based on the most recent update, the manufacturing of the device was ahead of schedule so staff is hoping that it could be in by the end of April rather than the end of May. She explained that they would install it upon completion of the manufacturing. Mr. Anderson stated that he knew that there had been samples collected and asked if there was any indication of environmental impact or potential problems. In response, Mrs. Duca advised that, as explained in her memo dated March 6, 2018, because of the sampling results received, staff had to go back and remove all liquid from the stormwater management pond located at the old Berry Van Lines site, and apply lime to help control the area. She explained that Silver Lake involves much more complex chemical analysis due to the nature of the lake and staff is waiting to receive the report from the Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control (DNREC). Mrs. Duca stated that it did appear as though there may be some kind of effect; however, she could not speak to the analysis in terms of the extent or whether it is within tolerable ranges. Mr. Anderson asked whether there were anticipated environmental costs related to this and if the City would be solely responsible or if the cost would be split between the City and County. Responding, Mrs. Duca stated that as the City moves forward with the data, further discussions with the County would definitely involve the City Manager. She advised that at this time she could not assess the actual cost of what may have to be done for further clean-up, explaining that it is difficult to surmise what may have to be done in regard to the lake, for example. Mrs. Duca explained that the City is paying for the costs at this point but future arrangements are still up in the air. Mr. Neil stated that PS #7 is located in his neighborhood and is known as “Big Stinky,” which is why it was planned to have the scrubber clean it out. He noted that the problem was fortunately not affecting water. Mr. Neil advised that this would be a long-term project because the City is tied very closely to the County. He explained that the pipeline extending from Denneys Road to Capital Station will be replaced in two (2) years, which will affect traffic along Route 13. He noted that the current problem is a City problem; however, it is also a City/County problem because of its connection with this pipeline. He advised that he had tried to alert his neighborhood area, which was being affected, and he complimented staff for taking care of the immediate problem. In response to Mr. Neil’s comments, Mrs. Duca stated that she completely agreed that it is in the City’s best interest for the County to get the line repaired. She explained that the County is planning to re-line it rather than dig it up. Mrs. Duca advised that this project will have a tremendous impact on traffic because the line runs down the median of Route 13, where turn lanes into facilities are located. She stated her understanding that the County’s plans for the project are currently being reviewed

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 26, 2018 PAGE 27 and discussed with the Delaware Department of Transportation (DelDOT). Mrs. Duca indicated that part of the project could hopefully move forward toward the end of this year. Responding to Mrs. Doyle, Mrs. Duca stated that the City has 44 pump stations, noting that the County owns and operates a few of these stations, such as the stations off Denneys Road and Water Street. She advised that, in the past, an odor could often be experienced coming from the Water Street station, and the County had installed an air scrubber unit at that location. Mrs. Duca explained that the solution for the City’s station had been identified through working with the County, based on their experience and research at County stations. In response to Mrs. Doyle, Mrs. Duca advised that, because of the environment that PS #7 experiences, its wires are cleaned on a regular basis. She stated that, depending on the station, wires may be inspected weekly. Mrs. Duca explained that some things in pump stations are checked daily, but there are some things that operators cannot check without taking the station out of operation, which creates a tremendous issue. She advised that, for this reason, while PS #7 had been down staff had been moving forward with trying to install more corrosive resistant materials, etc., in it. Mrs. Duca stated that all City stations have a regular maintenance schedule, and the amount of flow that goes through them determines the frequency of maintenance, because this, as well as the environment that it’s faced with, could factor in the mechanical wear and tear. She noted that some stations have very little flow going through them. Mrs. Duca advised that the overall goal is to get to each station every day, Monday through Friday, noting that this particular station will be monitored seven (7) days a week for some time in the immediate future. Responding to Mrs. Doyle, Mrs. Duca explained that outflow would have gotten into Silver Lake due to the effects of stormwater management throughout the state. She stated that anywhere that there are roadways, there are ditches to help control the drainage off the roads. Mrs. Duca advised that there may be storm sewers that ultimately run off some properties into these drainage ditches. She stated that the ditches at the location of the pump station along Leipsic Road ultimately go to other ditches that discharge to Silver Lake. Mrs. Duca advised that there are sampling locations at multiple places because of the ultimate discharge location. In response to Mrs. Doyle, Mrs. Duca stated that the City does not treat its stormwater, noting that this could be a matter of debate based upon current stormwater regulations if bio-filters, etc., could be considered treatment of stormwater. She noted that bio-filters are relatively new and are not everywhere. Mr. Cole expressed thanks to Mrs. Kay Sass, Public Affairs and Emergency Management Coordinator, who was instrumental in getting the word out to the businesses along the route during the time period of the event, and to Mrs. Duca for the update and her hard work.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 26, 2018 PAGE 28 Mr. Neil moved for acceptance of the Council Committee of the Whole Report, seconded by Mr. Sudler and unanimously carried. CITY MANAGER'S ANNOUNCEMENTS Mrs. Donna Mitchell, City Manager, announced that trash collection delayed the previous week due to the inclement weather had been collected. She noted that there would be no trash collection on Friday, March 30th, due to the Good Friday holiday, and that Friday’s trash pickup would be collected on Monday, April 2nd. Mrs. Mitchell announced that Spring Cleanup would be held from April 9th through April 20th and she provided a flyer with the guidelines for members to share with their constituents, noting that it would also be provided electronically. She noted that the information was posted on the City’s Facebook page, as well as the website. COUNCIL MEMBERS' ANNOUNCEMENTS Council President Slavin announced that the following day was Councilman Cole’s birthday and he wished him a happy birthday. Mr. Neil, noting that March 30th was the first night of Passover, wished all those of the Jewish faith a very happy Passover and expressed his hope that the freedom that is celebrated at that time affects all people around the world. Mr. Sudler thanked everyone who came out to the Black Community State of Emergency meeting and thanked Mayor Christiansen, Police Chief Mailey and former Police Chief Hosfelt for participating in that forum. Mr. Sudler noted that it was a very productive meeting and that the next meeting would be held on April 18, 2018 in the Council Chambers at City Hall. Mr. Lewis wished everybody in the community a happy Easter. Mr. Sudler moved for adjournment, seconded by Mr. Neil and unanimously carried. Meeting adjourned at 7:44 p.m. TRACI A. McDOWELL CITY CLERK All ordinances, resolutions, motions, and orders adopted by City Council during their Regular Meeting of March 26, 2018, are hereby approved. ROBIN R. CHRISTIANSEN MAYOR /TM

PETITION TO AMEND TEXT of Dover Code of Ordinances and Zoning Ordinance Report to the Dover City Council for April 9, 2018 Report on Action of Planning Commission with Development Advisory Committee Review Report Proposed Changes: Text Amendments to the following: • Dover Code of Ordinances, Chapter 66 – Manufactured Homes • Dover Code of Ordinances, Appendix B: Zoning (Zoning Ordinance) o Article 3 – District Regulations, Section 8 – Manufactured Housing Zone o Article 12 – Definitions • Dover Code of Ordinances, Appendix F – Fees and Fines, Chapter 26 Businesses, Article II – Licenses and Chapter 66 – Manufactured Homes, Mobile Homes, and Land Lease Communities Summary of Amendment: The proposed amendment reorganizes and clarifies a portion of the updates to the Dover Code made in August 2016 through Ordinance #2016-16. The proposed amendment also brings the updates into compliance with provisions of the Delaware Code related to manufactured housing and rental housing. The updates affected include requirements for placing and licensing manufactured homes, standards for management and maintenance of land lease communities, taxation, and code enforcement. Ordinance Number: Proposed Ordinance #2018-01 (Proposed Staff Amendment #1) File Number: MI-18-03 Planning Commission Action: Following a public hearing on March 19, 2018 where one (1) member of the public spoke, the Planning Commission voted (8 members yes, 1 member recused) to table the proposed Ordinance #2018-01 until Planning Staff met with interested parties and the City Solicitor to ensure the proposed ordinance complies with State law and that it’s not over reaching. Discussion of the Planning Commission included questions on street conditions; the receipt of input from manufactured home community owners/operators and residents/tenants; permitting; responsibilities and delegation of maintenance of common areas and roadways; the establishment of office hours; the provisions for

MI-18-03 Text Amendments: Manufactured Housing and Land Lease Communities Report to City Council from the Planning Commission Meeting of March 19, 2018 Page 2 of 4 receipts for rent payments; and questions regarding the public testimony. See the included Excerpt of the DRAFT Meeting Minutes of the March 19, 2018 Planning Commission meeting. Attachments: • DAC Comments: Department of Public Works, Office of the Fire Marshal and DelDOT • Excerpt of Draft Minutes from March 19, 2018 Planning Commission Meeting o Copy of Handout Submitted during Public Hearing (Copy of Comments and Copy of Supreme Court Case Cantinca v. Fontana) • Ordinance #2018-01 The following Report consists of the Development Advisory Committee Report (of March 9, 2018) on MI-18-03 Text Amendments: Manufactured Housing and Land Lease Communities (Dover Code of Ordinances, Chapter 66 and Zoning Ordinance, Article 3, Section 8 and Article 12). This includes the City Planner’s Report on the proposed Text Amendment. This information was provided to the Planning Commission for their March meeting. Development of the Ordinance Following the August 8, 2016 adoption of revisions to the Dover Code of Ordinances, Chapter 66 – Manufactured Homes, Mobile Homes, and Land Lease Communities; Appendix B, Zoning Ordinance, Article 3 Section 8 – Manufactured Housing Zone; and several other sections of the Dover Code, several members of the manufactured housing community, including homeowners and park owners, came forward with concerns about the adopted ordinance. In the process of evaluating these concerns, Planning Staff identified a series of further improvements that could be made principally to Chapter 66 to better organize the section, clarify processes and enforcement, and ensure compliance with State law. Ensuring the code’s compliance with the portions of State law related to the legal obligations of landlords and tenants (Delaware Code, Title 25, Chapters 53 and 55) and to manufactured homes and manufactured home communities (Delaware Code, Title 25, Chapters 70 and 71) in particular were meant to address the community’s concerns with the 2016 ordinance. Staff also identified potential changes in the Zoning Ordinance to support the main series of changes in Chapter 66 (see further description below). Current Proposed Ordinance Key components of proposed Ordinance #2018-01 include the following: • Reorganization of Chapter 66. The new sections of the Chapter are as follows: 66-1, Purpose Statement; 66-2, Definitions; 66-3, Manufactured and Mobile Homes; 66-4, Land Lease Communities; 66-5, Real Property Taxes; 66-6, Enforcement and Penalties; and 66-7, Exemptions. • Addition of a Purpose Statement establishing the reasons for regulating Manufactured Homes and Land Lease Communities. • New definitions for Land Lease Community Operator and Land Lease Community Owner

MI-18-03 Text Amendments: Manufactured Housing and Land Lease Communities Report to City Council from the Planning Commission Meeting of March 19, 2018 Page 3 of 4 in Chapter 66. • Detailed requirements for placement, inspection, and licensing of Manufactured Homes, as well as moving in or out of the City and use of City utilities. • Addition of a provision allowing land lease community owners to delegate maintenance responsibility over part of a community to a homeowner or other party through an appropriate legal contract. City Code Enforcement is to work with these parties to resolve maintenance issues where such contracts exist. In the 2016 version of this ordinance, the land lease community owner was held responsible for all maintenance. This contravened Title 25, Chapter 53 of the Delaware Code, which allows landlords and tenants to agree in writing that certain maintenance tasks are to be performed by tenants. • Reduction of the number of hours during which a land lease community owner is required to have office hours for the residents. • Allows land lease community owners more time in which to provide a receipt for rent payment to a resident who requests one. • No change to taxation; manufactured homes placed on permanent foundations will continue to be taxed while manufactured homes not placed on permanent foundations will continue to pay license fees in lieu of taxation. The City will not specify an approved method for a home to attain a permanent foundation. • For homeowners, detailed penalties for failing to obtain placement permits or manufactured home licenses. For community owners, detailed penalties for failing to perform required maintenance or record-keeping. • Revision of the Provisional Order to better establish that revoking the business license of a Land Lease Community is a measure of last resort, only imposed when there are cumulative unresolved violations creating a nuisance. • In Zoning Ordinance, Article 3 §8, establishing that both manufactured homes and permanently placed manufactured homes are permitted, but not on the same lot. The purpose of this is to allow land lease communities composed of permanently placed, taxed homes, but prevent communities which include both permanent, taxed homes and impermanent, untaxed homes. In such a community it would be very difficult for the City’s Tax Office to track which homes are taxed and which are not. • In Zoning Ordinance, Article 3 §12, adding a definition for permanently placed manufactured home. Action History City Council Committee of the Whole/Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee was presented with proposed Ordinance #2018-01 at its February 13, 2018 Meeting. The Committee recommended approval of the proposed Ordinance. Because text amendments are proposed to the Zoning Ordinance, a Public Hearing and Recommendation by the Planning Commission was required. The Planning Commission Public Hearing was held at their meeting of March 19, 2018, after which the Commission acted to table the proposed Ordinance.

MI-18-03 Text Amendments: Manufactured Housing and Land Lease Communities Report to City Council from the Planning Commission Meeting of March 19, 2018 Page 4 of 4 City Council is scheduled to conduct a Public Hearing and act on the proposed Ordinance #2018- 01 at their meeting of April 9, 2018. Planning Staff Review and Recommendations (of March 9, 2018) Planning Staff developed the proposed Ordinance #2018-01 regarding Manufactured Housing and Land Lease Communities and therefore, recommends its adoption. The Planning Office received comments from other Development Advisory Committee (DAC) members and has taken these under review. Based on the comments the Planning Office may offer revisions to the proposed Ordinance. The comments are summarized below. DAC Agency Ordinance Proposed Revision Reason/Notes Review Lines Comment Public 167 Add stormwater facilities This section deals with private utilities, Works to line 167 and currently lists water and sewer utilities among others; stormwater should also be mentioned. Fire N/A Possible revisions to City Staff has initiated the initial Marshal/ conform this update to research to begin the process to Chief the 2018 International consider adoption of the 2018 Building Residence Code (IRC), International Code Council code Inspector Appendix E - series. In the future, a cross-check Manufactured Housing between the provisions of this used as Dwellings ordinance and the new IRC will be needed to ensure there are no conflicts. Proposed Staff Amendment #1 Planning Staff reviewed the current proposed ordinance and the comments received to develop a Staff Amendment to include the additional clarifications and changes based on department/agency concerns. The proposed changes presented as Staff Amendment #1 is outlined below. • Add “stormwater facilities” to sentence starting on line 167. To read as follows by inserting the text in bold, blue font: All private water, sewer, electric, and gas lines and connections and stormwater facilities intended to serve common areas or the private property of tenants within the community shall be kept in good repair at all times by the land lease community owner. Planning Commission Review and Action Following a public hearing on March 19, 2018 where one (1) member of the public spoke, the Planning Commission voted (8 members yes, 1 member recused) to table the proposed Ordinance until Planning Staff met with interested parties and the City Solicitor to ensure the proposed ordinance complies with State law. Although the proposed Ordinance was written with the intention of conforming the City’s manufactured home code provisions to State law, the member of the public who spoke alleged that the proposed Ordinance had yet to achieve this goal and provided detailed comments to that effect. Based on the public comments the Planning Office may offer additional revisions to the proposed Ordinance.

CITY OF DOVER APPLICATION REVIEW COMMENTARY FEBRUARY 26, 2018 APPLICATION: Text Amendment Zoning Ordinance, Dover Code of Ordinances Chapter 66 and Article 3 Section 8 and Article 12 for Manufactured Housing and Land Lease Communities FILE #: MI-18-02 REVIEWING AGENCY: City of Dover Electric and Public Works Departments CONTACT PERSON: Jason A. Lyon, P.E. – Public Works CONTACT PHONE #: Public Works – 302-736-7025 T HE S UBJECT P ROPOSAL HAS BEEN R EVIEWED FOR C ODE C OMPLIANCE , P LAN C ONFORMITY AND C OMPLETENESS IN A CCORDANCE WITH THIS A GENCY ’ S A UTHORITY AND A REA OF E XPERTISE . T HE F OLLOWING I TEMS HAVE BEEN I DENTIFIED AS E LEMENTS W HICH N EED TO BE A DDRESSED BY THE A PPLICANT : CITY AND STATE CODE REQUIREMENTS ELECTRIC 1. No objections to the proposed amendments. WATER / WASTEWATER 1. None. STORMWATER 1. Please add stormwater facilities to line 167. SANITATION / STREETS / GROUNDS 1. None. RECOMMENDATIONS SUGGESTED AS CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TO MEET CODE OBJECTIVES ELECTRIC / WATER / WASTEWATER / STORMWATER / STREETS / SANITATION / GROUNDS / GENERAL 1. None. ADVISORY COMMENTS TO THE APPLICANT ELECTRIC / WATER / WASTEWATER / STORMWATER / SANITATION / STREETS / GROUNDS 1. None I F Y OU H AVE A NY Q UESTIONS OR N EED TO D ISCUSS ANY OF THE A BOVE C OMMENTS , P LEASE C ALL THE A BOVE C ONTACT P ERSON AND THE P LANNING D EPARTMENT AS S OON AS P OSSIBLE .

C F MI-18-02 I I T R CITY OF DOVER Y E DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE O M F A APPLICATION REVIEW COMMENTARY R D.A.C. MEETING DATE: 03/07/18 D S O H V A E L R APPLICATION: Text Amendments: Manufactured Housing and Land Lease Communities FILE #: MI-18-02 REVIEWING AGENCY: City of Dover, Office of the Fire Marshal CONTACT PERSON: Jason Osika, Fire Marshal PHONE #: (302) 736-4457 THE SUBJECT PROPOSAL HAS BEEN REVIEWED FOR CODE COMPLIANCE, PLAN CONFORMITY, AND COMPLETENESS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THIS AGENCY’S AUTHORITY AND AREA OF EXPERTISE. THE FOLLOWING ITEMS HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED AS ELEMENTS WHICH NEED TO BE ADDRESS BY THE APPLICANT: ADDITIONAL / SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS TO OBTAIN APPROVAL: 1. The Fire Marshal’s Office has no comments at this time 2. The Chief Building Inspector has the following comment: Ordinance #2018-01, Chapter 66- Manufactured Homes, Mobile Homes and Land Lease Communities, 2018 Building Code(s) inclusive of Appendix E of the 2018 IRC, The 2018 building code draft ordinance will reference “Chapter 66- Manufactured Homes, Mobil Homes and Land Lease Communities” in addition to “Appendix E Manufactured Housing used as Dwellings” within the 2018 IRC. It is unknown if cross reference has been done between “Chapter 66”, the proposed ordinance(s), “Appendix E” and or other related parts of the building code/life safety code(s) to confirm or deny continuity to those codes/ordinances and as referenced within the same. APPLICABLE CODES LISTED BELOW (NOT LIMITED TO): 2015 NFPA 1 Fire Code (NFPA; National Fire Protection Association) 2015NFPA 101 Life Safety Code (NFPA; National Fire Protection Association) 2013 NFPA 72 National Fire Alarm and Signaling Code (NFPA; National Fire Protection Association) 2013 NFPA 13 Installation of Sprinkler Systems (NFPA; National Fire Protection Association) 2009 IBC (International Building Code) Latest editions of all other NFPA Codes as defined by the Delaware State Fire Prevention Regulations 2015 Delaware State Fire Prevention Regulations City of Dover Code of Ordinances *If you have any questions or need to discuss any of the above comments, please call the above contact person listed.

CITY OF DOVER D E DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE L APPLICATION REVIEW COMMENTARY D O D.A.C. MEETING DATE: February 28, 2018 T =============================================================== APPLICATION: Text Amendment: Manufactured Housing and Land Lease Communities FILE#: MI-18-02 REVIEWING AGENCY: DelDOT CONTACT PERSON: Joshua Schwartz PHONE#: 760-2768 =============================================================== THE SUBJECT PROPOSAL HAS BEEN REVIEWED FOR CODE COMPLIANCE, PLAN CONFORMITY AND COMPLETENESS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THIS AGENCY'S AUTHORITY AND AREA OF EXPERTISE. THE FOLLOWING ITEMS HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED AS ELEMENTS WHICH NEED TO BE ADDRESSED BY THE APPLICANT: CITY & STATE CODE REQUIREMENTS: DelDOT has no comments regarding city & state code at this time. RECOMMENDATIONS SUGGESTED AS CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TO MEET CODE OBJECTIVES: DelDOT has no recommendations at this time. ADVISORY COMMENTS TO THE APPLICANT: • DelDOT has no comments. If you have any questions or need to discuss any of the above comments, please call the above contact person and the planning department as soon as possible.

CITY OF DOVER PLANNING COMMISSION March 19, 2018 Excerpt from Meeting Minutes – Draft The Regular Meeting of the City of Dover Planning Commission was held on Monday, March 19, 2018 at 7:00 PM in the City Hall Council Chambers with Chairman Mr. Tolbert presiding. Members present were Mr. Holden, Mr. Roach, Ms. Edwards, Mr. Holt, Mr. Baldwin, Dr. Jones, Mrs. Welch, Ms. Maucher and Mr. Tolbert. Staff members present were Mrs. Dawn Melson- Williams, Mr. Eddie Diaz, Mr. Julian Swierczek, Mr. Jason Lyon, and Mrs. Kristen Mullaney. MI-18-03 Text Amendments: Manufactured Housing and Land Lease Communities (Dover Code of Ordinances, Chapter 66 and Zoning Ordinance, Article 3, Section 8 and Article 12) – Public Hearing and Review for Recommendation to City Council on Text Amendments to the Dover Code of Ordinances, Chapter 66 - Manufactured Homes, Mobile Homes, and Lend Lease Communities; to Zoning Ordinance, Article 3, Section 8- Manufactured Housing (MH) Zone; and to Zoning Ordinance, Article 12- Definitions. The proposed ordinance reorganizes and clarifies a portion of the updates to the Dover Code made in August 2016 through Ordinance #2016-16. The proposed ordinance also brings the updates into compliance with provisions of the Delaware Code related to manufactured housing and rental housing, particularly Title 25, Chapters 53, 55, 70, and 71. The updates affected include requirements for placing and licensing manufactured homes, standards for management and maintenance of land lease communities, taxation, and code enforcement. A distinction is also made between manufactured homes and permanently placed manufactured homes in the Zoning Ordinance. • A copy of the Proposed Ordinance #2018-01 is available on the City’s website www.cityofdover.com under the Government Heading: Ordinances, Resolutions & Tributes. https://www.cityofdover.com/ordinances-and-resolutions The Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee reviewed the proposed Text Amendments on February 13, 2018 and the First Reading before City Council occurred on February 26, 2018. The Public Hearing before the Planning Commission is set for March 19, 2018 and Public Hearing and Final Reading before City Council is on April 9, 2018. Representative: None Mr. Tolbert recused himself because he is resides in a manufactured home. Mr. Diaz stated that this is series of Text Amendments to the Dover Code of Ordinances. The majority are in Chapter 66 Manufactured Homes, Mobile Homes and Land Lease Communities. A few are also in the Zoning Ordinance, Article 3 Section 8 which is the Manufactured Housing Zone and the Zoning Ordinance, Article 12 Definitions. We last had a major update to the provisions of the Code dealing with manufactured housing back in August 2016. Following that update and some concerns raised by the manufactured housing community, they recognized the need for additional changes to better conform the Ordinance with State Law and then also to clarify the procedures for enforcing the Ordinance and finally to reorganize Chapter 66 so that it would be easier to navigate and present the information in it in a more straight forward manner. Some of the substantial changes of this Ordinance include adding provisions to let land lease community owners pass on maintenance responsibilities to tenants. There are also revised Excerpt of Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of March 19, 2018 Page 1 of 10

provisions for office hours and rent receipts. In the Zoning Ordinance, there are provisions establishing that homes which are taxed and homes which only pay manufactured home license fees would not be permitted on the same parcel of land in order to simplify the Tax Assessor’s tracking of what is taxed and what isn’t. We received a few comments from the Development Advisory Committee regarding the proposal. One is that stormwater facilities should be added to the list of private utilities a community owner would normally be responsible for. That has resulted in Staff Amendment #1 which can be found at the end of the DAC Report. The other major comment was that the Chief Building Inspector asked us to cross check the proposed changes with the upcoming proposed changes to the Building Code which is being updated from the 2009 version of the International Residential Code to the 2018 version. The 2018 version contains its own provisions for manufactured homes and they were asked to make sure that there would be no conflicts. Tonight, the proposed ordinance updates need either a positive or a negative recommendation from the Commission members. Staff will forward that recommendation to City Council for their approval or denial of the Ordinance. Mr. Holt stated that he noticed that some of the streets going into the trailer parks need a lot of work done. Some of them have bad holes in the streets and if you are not careful you will end up losing a wheel or something. He questioned if this Ordinance will try to correct this situation in the parks? Responding to Mr. Holt, Mr. Diaz stated that where the streets are the private property of the manufactured housing community, this should create some stronger provisions for enforcing that maintenance. Ms. Maucher questioned if there has been any input from the manufactured home community owner/operators or residents/tenants? Responding to Ms. Maucher, Mr. Diaz stated that input from the manufactured housing community owners was in large part of what lead to these proposed amendments during the second round. Their concern with the original amendment that passed in 2016 was that it might contradict some aspects of State private property laws. The original Ordinance didn’t contain allowances for them to by contract, assign maintenance over certain parts of their community to their tenants. For instance, the area immediately surrounding their homes and the landscaping that might be in that. That was the major concern that led to the change, but Staff believes that they have gone further than that in making the Ordinance clearer than it was before. Dr. Jones stated that her concern would be if the homeowners had benefit of reading or hearing the changes or was the complete confidence placed in Staff and others to make the revisions? She is not uncomfortable; she just senses that there was reference to the concern from the very beginning. Responding to Dr. Jones, Mr. Diaz stated that homeowner representation was mainly led by Councilman Neil who sponsored the Ordinance. Mr. Holden questioned if Staff could count the changes as being more or less protective of the tenants or provide us some commentary towards that end that gives them a flavor for what the changes are going to impart in the practical sense moving forward. Responding to Mr. Holden, Mr. Diaz stated that the original intent of the Ordinance updates in 2016 was definitely to be protective of the tenants by the provisions for maintenance directed at the community owners, Excerpt of Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of March 19, 2018 Page 2 of 10

adding better record keeping requirements, the requirement to post office hours where an onsite representative of the owner would be required to be at the community and things like requiring the owner to provide receipts to homeowners when they made payments for rent. With this latest Ordinance update, they have rolled that back a little bit to make things a bit easier on the community owners because their feedback was that the new provisions were too strict and didn’t allow them the flexibility they needed to work with the tenants to share maintenance and responsibilities. Mr. Holden stated that he found it a little odd that in order to move a manufactured home from its current site the owner has to get a Demolition Permit. Is it just lack of another process that it would account for? He is not sure why a Demolition Permit applies there. Responding to Mr. Holden, Mr. Diaz stated that a Demolition Permit applies because although the house itself may not be disassembled or trashed, there are still things that would have to happen to the site that would potentially be considered demolition like removing the footers of the old house, disconnecting utilities, etc. It is a sort of a misnomer for naming but that is something that has not changed since before the 2016 Ordinance. Mr. Tolbert stated that Mr. Diaz made a statement that the development owners are responsible for the streets in the communities of manufactured homes or mobile homes. Responding to Mr. Tolbert, Mr. Diaz stated that where the streets are actually on the landowner’s property and where they are private street they (the landowners) need to be responsible for the streets. Mr. Tolbert stated that why he raised that question is because the development in which he lives in, the homes are on a permanent foundation and the streets are owned by the City. The City is responsible for the streets and therefore they pay for street repair and snow removal. Responding to Mr. Tolbert, Mr. Diaz stated that Persimmon Park Place is a manufactured home community that unlike the others in the City is not also a land lease community. There is no overarching land owner who owns all of the land beneath the manufactured homes. The homes and the lots are owned by the individual homeowners and the streets in the development are owned by the City so this amendment would not apply to the streets in that particular development. Dr. Jones stated that in the 2016 version, the land lease community owner was held responsible for all of the maintenance and she thinks that she read that the responsibility was going to be split or shared. Responding to Dr. Jones, Mr. Diaz stated that what it does is it allows the maintenance to be split or shared. It doesn’t say that the land owner must do this or the tenant must do this; it says that the landowner must be responsible for all maintenance unless it is specifically designated to a tenant by a private contract. Dr. Jones questioned if this change was initiated to be a little easier on the community owner? Responding to Dr. Jones, Mr. Diaz stated yes. Mr. Holden stated that to the specific point that Dr. Jones was trying to make, in Section 66- 4(a)v. Delegation of Maintenance Duties, that seems to allow under appropriate contract the responsibility of maintenance for roads or other to be transferred. The challenge is how do they ensure that that’s a process that typically the residents of land lease communities are able to understand and proceed through. It tilts the favor back towards the land lease underlying owner Excerpt of Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of March 19, 2018 Page 3 of 10

and he doesn’t necessarily know that that is bad or good but it’s a challenge that he thinks maybe some more discussion is needed on. Responding to Mr. Holden, Mr. Diaz stated that in terms of the City determining or learning who is responsible for what, it is something that Planning Staff is going to have to work closely with Code Enforcement Staff on who in turn will have to work closely with the community owners and residents. Currently, when routine Code Enforcement issues come up in a lot of the manufactured home parks, for instance, trash left out on the street our Code Enforcement Officers go to the homeowners first. For less routine things like potholes in the road, they will go to the community owners first. He foresees that under the new Ordinance, that will largely continue to be the case. In cases where a land owner or a community owner can furnish proof in the form of the contract in question that responsibility needs to go to a different party then our Code Enforcement Staff can be redirected accordingly. Mr. Holden stated that other than the correspondence you have had with the owners of these types of properties have you had other entities push for that allowed delegation of maintenance? Responding to Mr. Holden, Mr. Diaz stated no. Mr. Holden questioned if currently it is the underlying owner that is responsible? Responding to Mr. Holden, Mr. Diaz stated that under the current 2016 Ordinance, the letter of the Code holds the owner responsible but their allegation to Staff is that they could not be held responsible because the language of the Code that is currently in place would go against other laws. The allowance for the delegation of maintenance responsibilities to a different party comes from the Delaware Code, Title 25 Chapters 53 and 55 which is the Landlord Tenant Code. Without the addition of this particular provision, they would be going against State Law. Mr. Holden questioned if the City Solicitor offered that opinion to Staff? Responding to Mr. Holden, Mr. Diaz stated yes, he believes so. Mr. Holden stated that his concern is that it is easy to pass off responsibility to an HRA or a Homeowner’s Association. He knows the wrangle that we have had in the State with getting Homeowner’s Associations to take care of their roads and their stormwater ponds and generally it’s a process that doesn’t work. His concern is that the responsibility gets passed along and then allows these facilities to fall under greater disrepair. Those HOA’s are much harder to get called to task to rectify a situation. He personally would love to challenge the City Solicitor to find us a path that can hold the underlying land owner, the person with the means to resolve a lot of these issues more responsible. At the end of the day, that cost likely gets flowed through to the residents but then they ensure as a City that these areas are going to be maintained and not have a negative drain on the City as a whole. He would seek from Staff a path to allow that time. How might the Planning Commission offer a pause to give that a closer look? Ms. Maucher questioned if there was any requirement that the entity receiving responsibility has the technical expertise or the knowledge or financial ability to carry out those responsibilities? It’s kind of vague in that regard and having dealt with failing wastewater systems, it can be unpleasant if they don’t have the expertise. Responding to Ms. Maucher, Mr. Diaz stated that from a practical standpoint, he has a hard time foreseeing a circumstance where a land lease community owner would assign a homeowner responsibility for maintaining the whole stormwater pond behind their house. More typically, the sorts of maintenance responsibilities Excerpt of Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of March 19, 2018 Page 4 of 10

that are delegated are responsibility over the lot that the house sits on maintaining that lot free of trash or maintaining grass and whatever grass and bushes might be planted around the house. Without this provision, a homeowner could theoretically plant their own landscaping around the house and instead of taking care of it themselves; they could say it was the community owners so they should maintain it. Mr. Holden stated that there certainly seems that there should be the ability to split out maintenance on the lot which he thinks is the issue with the Landlord Tenant Code and also maintenance of the roadways and/or utilities which are ones that a single resident has no ability to impact. He thinks that we could all agree that HOA’s generally are not as adept as the underlying owner at taking care of those. He doesn’t know our path and he asks Staff how the Commission can put this back in Staff’s laps and give them some time to do what they may do with it? Do they table this action for the evening? He personally doesn’t think that putting roads and utilities in an HOA is the right path either for the residents or for the City as a whole. Responding to Mr. Holden, Mrs. Melson-Williams stated that if the Planning Commission has some concerns about a particular section they could certainly in taking their action this evening make the recommendation that certain provisions or topic areas be further addressed or evaluated by Staff to bring additional information back to the Commission. The Commission could certainly do that without making a final recommendation on the entire package. This is subject to public hearing this evening. As with all text amendments, that (notice) was published in the local newspaper so there is that opportunity as well as being posted on these various agendas and the First Reading that occurred at City Council. There is nothing in our Code that requires us to send this proposed Text Amendment to every property owner and/or tenant that it may affect. On the question about how to move forward with this package, if you have concerns about the Text Amendment and would seek additional information you could certainly defer action on it until you receive a specific list of information and it could be brought up for continued discussion at a specific future meeting of the Commission. Mr. Tolbert stated that in his experience with HOA’s they don’t seem knowledgeable enough to carry out the duties that they are supposed to carry out in being responsible for the developments that they are overseeing. Dr. Jones stated that as we possibly defer action she would suggest that there are a couple of other things, in her opinion, that need to be tightened. She is not trying to make things difficult for the community owners. On Page 5 Office Hours (line 185), in her mind this doesn’t really give a feeling of assurance to the tenants that there are going to be regular fixed office hours. Maybe she is adding a little bit too much to this and she doesn’t want to nit-pick but if this is what people have to live by then we want to make very certain that there is not a lot left for interpretation. In Section 66-4(b)ii Receipt for Lot Payment (line 194), has this not been the case in the past? Responding to Dr. Jones, Mr. Diaz stated that there have been comments from various homeowners that they do not receive receipts for payment of rent so that was one of the things desired in the original 2016 Ordinance that is still here. Ms. Maucher questioned if the additions comport with the Landlord Tenant Code? Responding to Ms. Maucher, Mr. Diaz stated that the Landlord Tenant Code does include provisions for the provision of receipts. The feedback received on that was that those provisions don’t go far Excerpt of Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of March 19, 2018 Page 5 of 10

enough so we were asked to make our provisions for rent receipts more strict. Mr. Tolbert opened a public hearing. Mr. Michael Morton – First State Manufactured Housing Association Mr. Morton stated that he is the President of First State Manufactured Housing Association and he also represents many of the community owners in the State of Delaware. He brought with him comments that he would like included in the record (a copy was provided to the Commission). He can represent to the Commission as an attorney who has been practicing in Delaware for over 35 years that the parts of Mr. Diaz’s presentation that he heard were inconsistent with the law. This proposed Ordinance is a revision of changes that were passed roughly 18 months ago. They were stayed by agreement with the City Executive so that interest holders like himself and his clients could participate in the redrafting. They were told that they would be actively engaged in redrafting and the first notice that we got of a redraft was roughly 10 days ago that it was completed and would be heard this evening. This is quite a surprise to those of us who appeared at a prior time when the first version of this was heard. They have considerable concerns on the concept of pre-emption. He brought with him a case from the Supreme Court of Delaware that says these matters are pre-empted by State Law. That the efforts of the Dover City Council and the Planning Commission; however noble, conflict directly with the expressed provisions in the Manufactured Housing Act and are therefore unenforceable. He has gone through every single line of this Ordinance and he has highlighted roughly twenty-five specific examples where it conflicts with the Manufactured Housing Code. That is why this was stayed by agreement so that they could go through those to discuss them with the Solicitor. The Solicitor is well aware of their concerns about the constitutionality of this Ordinance and the enforceability of the Ordinance. Since he is handing out copies he will not go through every single thing. He will simply point out two very specific things and then a number of examples. The applicable Manufactured Housing Code Section 7001 very specifically says that in reference to the relationship between a landlord and a resident in a manufactured housing community, this Code regulates and determines that legal rights, remedies and obligations of all parties to a rental agreement wherever executed for a lot, a manufactured home and a manufactured home community within the State. The second provision that is in difficulty with this is the State Installation Code. It is very specific that it is the only Code governing installations of manufactured homes. The reason that he points out both of these is that multiple sections of this proposed Ordinance conflict directly with that. The Supreme Court in Cantinca vs. Montana back in 2005 referring back to a case in 1965 had made it absolutely clear that the prerogative on issues of this nature belong to the House and the Senate not to local entities like cities and counties. The purpose statement for this Ordinance itself clearly conflicts both with the purpose statement of the State Code and with the specific elements. Your purpose statement says that “this subchapter applies to rental agreements for manufactured home lots and regulates and determines legal rights and remedies.” It also references obligations for communications and other specific issues on maintenance and the like. All of these are specifically referenced in the State Code under the concept of pre-emption that determines the scope of those. This body is not authorized, empowered or cannot enforce an Ordinance that tramples on the specific language of the Manufactured Housing Code. The Manufactured Housing Code also says that sole enforcement rights of those rights and responsibilities lies with the Attorney General’s Office. From the beginning to the end, we have great concerns about this. He has written portions in his Excerpt of Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of March 19, 2018 Page 6 of 10

comments by line with specific references to the fact that even the definitions that the City has proposed to use conflict with the long term well recognized definitions in the Manufactured Housing Code. The Manufactured Housing Code which he calls in this response, sets forth extensively the maintenance requirements of land community owners such as Wild Meadows within the City of Dover. It sets forth the responsibilities and the obligations and it also sets forth the remedies for landlords and tenants in this relationship. They are extensive provisions and they distinctly define the rights and responsibilities of each party. Under the concept of pre- emption, you as a City cannot enlarge, decrease or impact of State stated rights and responsibilities however laudable your concerns might be. In the section of this proposed Ordinance, it references maintenance responsibilities. Starting with trees, there is specific contrary language in the State Code that says it does not include any responsibility to do some of the things that the City would define as being a responsibility of the community owner. Section 7006.13 of the Manufactured Housing Code very specifically references trees and that language is contrary to the language that the City is proposing. Section 7006.13L defines what a tree is and the definition is different. Section 7003.24 defines what a utility is and again it conflicts with the language contained in this proposed Ordinance. Section 66-3 of this proposed Ordinance conflicts entirely with the pre-empted language of Title 24 Delaware Code Chapter 44 which is the State Manufactured Installation Code. The reason he points that out is that even the inspectors for the City must be licensed and be certified by the State Installation Board. Even the standards are clearly State issued and State controlled that the City’s inspectors use to determine if an installation has been done properly. Therefore, the City cannot on their own determine what they think is acceptable or what should be added to the State Code. As he stated earlier, this has multiple difficulties. He would respectfully suggest that this body do what he was promised before by the Director before the current Director came into office, which is table it so that they can have a meaningful discussion as stakeholders on the conflicts so that you don’t spend unnecessary time proposing language and attempting to put it in place that will result inevitably in Court conflict. The final comment is regarding the licensing provision for the manufactured housing community he and his clients found in Subsection E – Provisional Order. This section proposes that an unresolved violation issued conceivably by the City as an instant ticket could be deemed to be a nuisance without any definition of what a nuisance is. The license that you are required to have to run the community could be revoked or impacted with no meaningful explanation in the body of this Ordinance as to the need for, the requirement of or the desire to have a deprivation hearing or due process for the community owner when they have been alleged to have had a violation. The definition itself under the provision for provisional orders conflicts directly word for word with the existing State Code. There is absolutely no reason for this to be in conflict. It’s contrary to the exclusive authority of the State for enforcement of this type of item and it leads to the impractical result of a community potentially having no license and not being able to operate as a community when they still have several hundred residents there. They checked every couple of months with the City Executive asking where this stood and the City Executive kept saying “we will get back to you.” When Mr. Hugg started working for the City, they checked with him every couple of months, specifically referencing the fact that they had a standstill agreement. No one ever denied that they had a standstill agreement and yet no one ever gave them an opportunity to give the feedback that they are giving tonight which would have been incredibly helpful in a drafting of an Ordinance within the confines of the concept of pre-emption. Excerpt of Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of March 19, 2018 Page 7 of 10

Mr. Holden stated that Mr. Morton mentioned some Dover communities that would be impacted by this that he represents. Who are those communities? Responding to Mr. Holden, Mr. Morton stated that he represents Wild Meadows which is an RHP community. It changed ownership a couple of months ago. They are one of the five largest ownership groups in the Country. He has a tentative agreement to represent two of the other three owners, but it’s not signed so he can’t fully disclose who they are right now. It’s certainly a concern both for those owners and for the association which represents all owners within the State of Delaware that this has to be consistent. The reason for pre-emption is so that you don’t have vastly different rules and regulations in each community. As you can imagine, his view of the hourly requirements for a manager to be present is considerably different than one that was voiced earlier tonight by one of the other members because there is nothing in the State Code that requires that. He respectfully suggests that he doesn’t see any other business where the City requires x number of hours for somebody who represents that business to be present and open and available for questions. Certainly, there is no such requirement for apartment complexes at the State level and they have exactly the same issue of pre-emption with residential apartments. Mr. Holden stated that City Council held a First Reading of this Ordinance. He asked if Mr. Morton was able to be present for that? Responding to Mr. Holden, Mr. Morton stated that he wasn’t even aware that it was going on because they had been told that they would be given notice before there was even a draft. The first notice that they received was received in his office on March 1, 2018 from Mr. Hugg indicating that it has already been drafted and that it has already had a First Reading. He doesn’t think that it is fair or equitable to keep telling them that they are going to participate and then not let them participate in the meaningful discussion about the language. Mr. Holden stated that they (the Planning Commission) had a fair amount of discussion over the concern over maintenance of common areas and the roadways really being the specific one. He asked if Mr. Morton had any commentary regarding that. Responding to Mr. Holden, Mr. Morton stated that the Code (Delaware Code) has specific language in the section that he cited that extensively details what the community owner’s responsibilities are including roads which means that it’s been addressed by the Code. If you follow the logic of his comments, it would mean that that’s what you have. You can’t, and he means this in the most respectful way possible, try and impose some additional obligations. That is was pre-emption means. Mr. Tolbert asked Mr. Morton to state the name of his organization and what his organization does in respect to this type of housing. Responding to Mr. Tolbert, Mr. Morton stated that we are the exclusive industry group for manufactured housing communities in the State of Delaware. It’s called First State Manufactured Housing Association. It was founded in 1995 and has represented the communities, retailers, vendors and installers in this industry since that time. They participated in the drafting of the statewide Installation Code. It was approved by the legislature and became part of the regulations. They participated in the drafting of the Manufactured Housing Code. He drafted significant portions of that. He was also a chairperson of the committee that drafted the Residential Landlord Tenant Code. This is not a new era for him; it’s an era of specialty for his firm and for him personally. His has absolutely no reservations about the accuracy of his concerns about pre-emption. Excerpt of Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of March 19, 2018 Page 8 of 10

Mr. Tolbert stated that Mr. Morton mentioned Wild Meadows and his understanding is that Wild Meadows is a land lease development. The development next door to it is a mobile home development where the homes are permanent, but it’s not land lease. Noble’s Pond is also a land lease operation. Responding to Mr. Tolbert, Mr. Morton stated that Noble’s Pond is not a manufactured housing community. The State Relocation Trust Authority has already decided that Noble’s Pond is not a manufactured housing community. Mr. Tolbert stated that Wild Meadows has asked the State to put a cap on the lease payments that they can pay and he thinks that the State refused to do that and they have had their hands full with that battle. Responding to Mr. Tolbert, Mr. Morton stated that one of the City Councilman is a long-term member of the community at Wild Meadows and has been an advocate for their issues in the legislature for many years. He would probably tell you that he was solely or significantly responsible for the imposition of rent justification in manufactured housing communities. There has been no State imposed limitation on the rent at Wild Meadows and we are half way through the required arbitration procedure for this year’s rent with the homeowner’s association for Wild Meadows tenants. They have had multiple ones of those and they have been quite successful in the court on those issues. Dr. Jones stated that Mr. Morton referenced a case. Is it in the information that was provided? Responding to Dr. Jones, Mr. Morton stated that it is attached to the master copy and is specifically referenced and cited in the case. It is also a case that the City Solicitor is well aware of and has been since before this first version was passed eighteen months ago. Ms. Maucher questioned if there are other stakeholders that should be informed of this process aside from your association such as representing particularly tenants in these types of communities? Responding to Ms. Maucher, Mr. Morton stated that he is fairly certain that Councilman Neil has notified all tenant advocacy groups of this pending Ordinance. He can tell you that the board of the First State Manufactured Housing Association is aware and all four owners of the communities located within the City limits are aware of it. The Association itself is considering the possibility of funding any litigation if we can’t have something worked out that will benefit everyone. They want to be at the table to discuss this. That is what they thought the deal was from the very beginning. Mr. Tolbert closed the public hearing. Mr. Holden stated that he thinks they had landed at some concerns that they aren’t quite able to address without the City Solicitor’s input to understand the legality of the path forward and the legality of trying to assure that their concerns will be addressed. Further, they are faced with a legal opinion shared that contravenes what the Ordinance is trying to get done. It seems like tabling the Ordinance to allow Staff and the City Solicitor time to give these comments some thought and address them. It seems like a reasonable path forward. Ms. Maucher moved to table MI-18-03 Text Amendments: Manufactured Housing and Land Lease Communities (Dover Code of Ordinances, Chapter 66 and Zoning Ordinance, Article 3, Section 8 and Article 12) in order to meet with the interested parties and the City Solicitor to ensure that it complies with the State Law and it’s not over reaching, seconded by Mr. Holt and Excerpt of Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of March 19, 2018 Page 9 of 10

the motion was carried 8-0 by roll call vote with Mr. Tolbert recused. Mr. Holden voting yes; due to the large number of outstanding questions. Mr. Roach voting yes. Ms. Edwards voting yes; for the reasons previously stated. Mr. Holt voting yes; to try to address all of our concerns before we tackle this problem again. Mr. Baldwin voting yes; for all of the reasons stated. Dr. Jones voting yes; for all of the reasons stated and to make sure that we are in compliance. Mrs. Welsh voting yes; due to all of the outstanding issues and in order to ensure that the issues are addressed before the application is brought back to the Planning Commission. Ms. Maucher voting yes; to ensure that there is sufficient input into the City Ordinance. Excerpt of Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of March 19, 2018 Page 10 of 10

FIRST READING CITY OF DOVER PROPOSED ORDINANCE #2018-01 1 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN 2 COUNCIL MET: 3 4 That Chapter 66 - Manufactured Homes, Mobile Homes, and Land Lease Communities be amended by 5 inserting the text indicated in bold, blue font and deleting the text indicated in red strikeout as follows: 6 7 Chapter 66 - Manufactured Homes, Mobile Homes, and Land Lease Communities 8 9 Sec. 66-1. – Purpose Statement. 10 11 The City of Dover recognizes that manufactured homes are a unique housing type with their own 12 history of placement and ownership traditions arising from their origins as mobile homes. A 13 modern manufactured home does not resemble a vehicle, and once placed is rarely moved. 14 However, most manufactured homes are owned as if they were vehicles, separate from the land 15 they are placed on, and may theoretically be moved at any time. Because of this the city recognizes 16 that consistent standards are needed for placement, licensing, and tracking of manufactured 17 homes, in order to ensure the homes’ orderly movement into, out of, and around the city. 18 19 The city further recognizes that land lease communities, which may give ground lease to 20 manufactured homes or other types of housing, typify a use of land which does not align perfectly 21 with either apartments or residential subdivisions. Because of this, areas of responsibility on the 22 part of residents, owners, and the city with regard to maintenance, communication, and taxation 23 can be unclear without the adoption of consistent standards governing these areas of 24 responsibility. The city recognizes that where responsibility is not clearly claimed detrimental 25 conditions can arise for residents. 26 27 This chapter therefore lays out the consistent standards needed for manufactured homes and land 28 lease communities, while updating and consolidating earlier regulations regarding mobile homes 29 and mobile home parks. The standards are intended to be applicable to all land lease communities 30 currently in the city or which may be established in the future. They are also intended to cover 31 both manufactured homes and permanently placed manufactured homes, and the issues unique to 32 each. 33 34 Sec. 66-166-2. - Definitions. 35 36 The following words, terms and phrases, when used in this chapter, shall have the meanings ascribed 37 to them in this section, except where the context clearly indicates a different meaning: 38 39 Land lease community means a residential development typified by single ownership of the land 40 within the development, with the landowner retaining the rights of ownership. Home sites or individual 41 lots within the community are leased to individual homeowners, who retain customary leasehold rights. 42 43 Land lease community operator means any person designated by contractual arrangement with 44 the land lease community owner to supervise or maintain a land lease community and interact 45 with its residents.

Proposed Ordinance #2018-01-Ch 66, Appx B, Arts 3 & 12, and Appx F–Fees & Fines Page 2 46 Land lease community owner means the owner of the underlying fee interest in the land where 47 a land lease community is sited. 48 49 Manufactured home means a factory-built housing unit designed and constructed to meet the 50 Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban 51 Development (HUD) Code. A manufactured home is built on a chassis that supports the structural 52 integrity of the home and to allow transport to the site. Factory-built units built to meet the HUD Code 53 and constructed after the code took effect on June 15, 1976 are classified as "manufactured homes." 54 55 Mobile home means a factory-built housing unit constructed on a chassis and completed before June 56 15, 1976. Prior to the HUD code, mobile homes were not subject to uniform construction or safety 57 standards. 58 59 Owner of a manufactured home or mobile home means the person designated in the vehicle title of 60 the manufactured home or mobile home, whether the title is issued by this state or by some other state. 61 62 Owner of a permanently placed manufactured home means the person designated in the vehicle or 63 real property title of the permanently placed manufactured home, whether the title is issued by this state 64 or by some other state. 65 66 Permanently placed manufactured home means a factory-built housing unit designed and 67 constructed to meet the Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards of the U.S. Department 68 of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Code, and that has also been placed upon a permanent, 69 unmovable foundation. 70 71 (Ord. of 2-23-1970, § 2; Code 1981, § 12-1; Ord. of 11-10-1986, § 1; Ord. No. 2016-16 , 8-8-2016) 72 73 Sec. 66-266-3. - Licenses.Manufactured and mobile homes. 74 75 (a) Placement permit. Every owner of a manufactured home shall apply for and obtain from 76 the city planner or his/her authorized agent a placement permit for such manufactured 77 home prior to placement of the home within the city. The owner of the manufactured 78 home shall pay a fee for such permit as provided for in Appendix F-Fees and Fines. No 79 certificate of occupancy shall be issued for a newly placed manufactured home that has 80 not also been issued a placement permit. 81 82 (b) Inspection. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any manufactured home, 83 the home shall pass inspection by the building inspector. The owner of the manufactured 84 home shall cause the home to be firmly attached to the ground by means of a permanent 85 foundation or anchors, and cause any open space beneath the unit to be skirted or 86 enclosed with material approved by the building inspector. 87 88 (c) License. The owner of any mobile home or manufactured home that is not placed on a 89 permanent foundation shall obtain an annual license for it. The owner of the mobile 90 home or manufactured home shall pay an annual fee for such license as provided for in 91 Appendix F-Fees and Fines. If such manufactured home is newly moved into the city, the

Proposed Ordinance #2018-01-Ch 66, Appx B, Arts 3 & 12, and Appx F–Fees & Fines Page 3 92 owner of the manufactured home shall obtain the license and shall pay the license fee 93 within seven days of issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the home. Payment of the 94 license fee shall be prorated on a quarterly basis for each fractional part of a year during 95 which the manufactured home is in the city. 96 97 (d) Conditions for license. No license for a new manufactured home shall be issued until the 98 home has passed inspection and received a certificate of occupancy as required by this 99 section. 100 101 (e) Moving within or out of city. When the owner of a mobile home or manufactured home 102 removes the home from its current site or lot, the owner shall obtain a demolition permit 103 for the removal. 104 105 (f) Use of city utilities. Owners of all types of manufactured homes shall coordinate with city 106 departments during the permitting and licensing process regarding the appropriate times 107 to transfer responsibility for utilities and activate service. 108 109 110 (a) Required fee . The owner of a mobile home or manufactured home that is not to be permanently 111 placed shall obtain an annual license for it and shall pay a fee for such license as provided for in 112 Appendix F—Fees and Fines. 113 114 (b) Payment; penalties . Such license shall be obtained and the license fee paid by August 1 of each 115 year and if such fee is not paid before September 1 of such year, then, in addition to any penalty 116 incurred pursuant to Appendix F—Fees and Fines, a penalty fee of ten percent per month shall 117 accrue on the unpaid balance of the license fee. 118 119 (c) Moving into city . Upon the moving of a manufactured home into the city, if the manufactured 120 home requires a license it shall be obtained and the license fee paid within seven days. Payment 121 of such license fee shall be prorated on a quarterly basis for each fractional part of a year during 122 which the manufactured home is in the city. 123 124 (d) Required fee for landowners . The owner of any land leased out as part of a land lease 125 community shall obtain an annual land lease community operator business license under the 126 provisions of Chapter 26—Businesses. 127 128 (Ord. of 2-23-1970, § 2; Ord. of 5-24-1976; Ord. of 3-27-1980; Code 1981, § 12-2; Ord. of 8-8-1988; 129 Ord. of 3-22-1993; Ord. No. 2009-09, 6-22-2009; Ord. No. 2016-16 , 8-8-2016) 130 131 Sec. 66-3. - Real property taxes. 132 133 A permanently placed manufactured home as defined in section 66-1, and the lot upon which it is 134 located shall be considered as being real property for purposes of valuation, assessment and taxation in 135 accordance with section 47 of the Charter. 136 137 (Code 1981, § 12-2.1; Ord. of 11-10-1986, § 2; Ord. No. 2016-16 , 8-8-2016)

Proposed Ordinance #2018-01-Ch 66, Appx B, Arts 3 & 12, and Appx F–Fees & Fines Page 4 138 Sec. 66-4. - Placement permit. 139 140 Every owner of a manufactured home, shall apply for and obtain from the city planner or his/her 141 authorized agent a placement permit for such manufactured home. The city planner or his/her authorized 142 agent shall issue no placement permit until the license fee required in this chapter is paid in full. 143 144 (Ord. of 2-23-1970, §§ 3, 6; Ord. of 5-24-1976; Code 1981, § 12-3; Ord. No. 2016-16 , 8-8-2016) 145 146 Sec. 66-566-4. - Duties of land lease community owners and operatorsLand lease communities. 147 148 (a) The following regulations shall apply to owners and operators of all land lease communities:the 149 maintenance of land lease communities: 150 151 i. Private road access. It shall be the responsibility of land lease community owners and 152 operators to maintain all private streets, driveway access to such streets, access to fire 153 hydrants, and access to central mailboxes so as to be clear from obstructions, including but 154 not limited to potholes, snow piles, and debris. 155 156 ii. Debris clearance. It shall be the responsibility of land lease community owners and operators 157 to ensure that all facilities and common areas within the community are kept in good repair 158 and maintained in such a manner as to prevent the accumulation of materials which could 159 cause a fire hazard or would cause insect or rodent breeding and harborage. 160 161 iii. Landscaping. All trees, shrubbery, lawns, and other landscaping features within the 162 community shall be maintained by the land lease community operatorowner to be in healthy 163 condition at all times. 164 165 iv. Utilities. All private water, sewer, electric, and gas lines and connections intended to serve 166 common areas or the private property of tenants within the community shall be kept in good 167 repair at all times by the land lease community operatorowner. Stormwater management 168 facilities shall be maintained so as to be free of blockage and to prevent the accumulation of 169 standing water that does not dissipate within 48 hours, except in facilities approved for 170 retention of water. Community owners shall coordinate with the City of Dover regarding 171 utility services and equipment. 172 173 v. Delegation of maintenance duties. Maintenance responsibilities detailed in subsections i. 174 through iv. of Section 66-4(a) may be delegated by the land lease community owner to 175 leaseholders, a land lease community operator, or other parties, provided that the 176 delegated party’s specific responsibilities are detailed in an appropriate legal contract. 177 All maintenance responsibilities not delegated shall be retained by the land lease 178 community owner. 179 180 (b) The following regulations shall be the reporting, record-keeping, and licensing 181 requirements of land lease communities: 182

Proposed Ordinance #2018-01-Ch 66, Appx B, Arts 3 & 12, and Appx F–Fees & Fines Page 5 183 vi. Office hours. The land lease community operator shall be present on site at a minimum 184 during regular business hours, so as to facilitate communication between tenants of the 185 community and the owner, and a 24-hour emergency contact shall be available to residents. 186 To facilitate communication between tenants of the community and the owner, the 187 land lease community owner or operator shall be present on site during fixed hours to 188 be communicated to residents and posted at the office. The office hours shall be no 189 less than 20 hours per week and shall not be between the hours of midnight and 7am. 190 A 24-hour emergency contact shall also be available to residents. 191 192 viii. Receipt for lot payment. The land lease community owner or operator shall provide a 193 written receipt or electronic receipt at the time a cash payment for rent payment has been 194 made, regardless of the form of payment. If a land lease community owner accepts a 195 form of payment other than cash, the community owner shall, within 2 days, give to 196 the tenant a receipt for that payment. The community owner or operator shall, for a 197 period of 3 years, maintain a record of all cash receipts for rent. 198 199 iii. Lease record; report. To assist in keeping city license records and tax records up to 200 date, land lease community owners who lease land to two or more persons for home 201 sites shall maintain a lease record, which shall be open for inspection at all reasonable 202 times by the city planner. Before July 1 of each year, the land lease community owner 203 shall report to the city planner the names and addresses of all persons having homes 204 on his land. 205 206 iv. Required license for landowners. The owner of any land leased out as part of a land 207 lease community shall obtain an annual land lease community operator business 208 license under the provisions of Chapter 26—Businesses, or direct the land lease 209 community operator to obtain this license. Only one business license shall be required 210 per land lease community. The fee for such license shall be based on the total number 211 of lots or home sites in the community, including both vacant and occupied lots and 212 sites. 213 214 (b) The following regulations shall additionally apply to owners and operators of land lease 215 communities leasing land to manufactured homes: 216 217 i. Documents to manufactured home owners. Copies of this chapter and placement permit 218 application forms shall be furnished to each land lease community owner, who shall give a copy 219 of the same to every manufactured home owner who moves a manufactured home into the 220 community, before the 15th day of the next succeeding month after placement of the 221 manufactured home. 222 223 ii. Enforcement. It shall be the responsibility of land lease community owners and operators to 224 ensure that all mobile homes and manufactured homes placed on their land maintain a current 225 license under section 66-2. 226 227 iii. Lease record; report. Land lease community owners who lease land to two or more persons 228 for siting manufactured homes shall maintain a lease record, which shall be open for inspection

Proposed Ordinance #2018-01-Ch 66, Appx B, Arts 3 & 12, and Appx F–Fees & Fines Page 6 229 at all reasonable times by the city planner. Before June 1 of each year, the land lease community 230 owner shall report to the city planner the names and addresses of all persons having 231 manufactured homes on his land. 232 233 iv. Sale of home. Before a home is sold by the homeowner, home owner's estate, foreclosure, 234 eviction or other means, the City of Dover must be notified and all delinquent taxes, fees, or 235 other charges must be paid. 236 237 v. The land lease community owner must notify the City of Dover if the community is placed 238 for sale. 239 240 (c) The following shall be considered appropriate methods of redress if the duties outlined in this 241 section are not fulfilled: 242 243 i. Any land lease community owner found to be in violation of the provisions of this section, 244 regardless of corrective actions taken, shall be assessed a fine as provided for in Appendix F— 245 Fees and Fines. Any such fine shall be in addition to any charges imposed upon the violator in 246 accordance with subsection (c)(ii) below. 247 248 ii. If required, the City of Dover may perform maintenance in the owner's stead following 249 official notice, and place a lien on the property to recover costs, including a 15 percent 250 administrative charge. 251 252 iii. Repeated failure to perform the required duties shall be cause to take action upon an owner's 253 land lease community operator license in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 26— 254 Businesses, Article II, Section 26-59. 255 256 Sec. 66-5. - Real property taxes. 257 258 A permanently placed manufactured home as defined in section 66-2-Definitions, and the lot upon 259 which it is located shall be considered as being real property for purposes of valuation, assessment 260 and taxation in accordance with section 47 of the Charter. Manufactured homes that are not 261 permanently placed shall not be taxed but shall pay the annual license fee required by this chapter 262 in lieu of taxes. 263 264 Sec. 66-6. – Enforcement and penalties. 265 266 (a) Licenses and permits. Enforcement of licensing and permitting requirements shall be as 267 follows: 268 269 i. Obtaining manufactured home licenses. If the owner of a mobile home or 270 manufactured home not permanently placed fails to obtain or renew the annual 271 license required by this chapter, a fine pursuant to Appendix F-Fees and Fines may 272 be assessed on the owner of the home, if the home has not been removed from the city. 273 ii. Obtaining placement permits. An owner of a manufactured home who places their 274 home without obtaining a placement permit to do so shall have the standard penalties

Proposed Ordinance #2018-01-Ch 66, Appx B, Arts 3 & 12, and Appx F–Fees & Fines Page 7 275 imposed for failure to obtain a building permit as outlined in Chapter 22 - Buildings 276 and Building Regulations of the Dover Code. 277 iii. Obtaining land lease community operator business licenses. A land lease community 278 owner who does not obtain an annual business license as required by this chapter 279 shall have the standard penalties imposed for failure to obtain a business license as 280 outlined in Chapter 26 - Businesses of the Dover Code. 281 (b) Land lease community maintenance requirements. Enforcement of community maintenance 282 requirements shall be as follows: 283 i. Violations and penalties. Any land lease community owner found to be in violation of the 284 provisions of Section 66-4(a) may be assessed a fine pursuant to Appendix F-Fees and 285 Fines. If required, the City of Dover may perform maintenance to correct the violation 286 in the owner’s stead, and add the cost of maintenance, including a 15 percent 287 administrative charge, to the fine to be assessed. 288 289 ii. Delegation of responsibilities. If a land lease community owner has via contractual 290 agreement delegated maintenance responsibilities over the portion of the property in 291 violation to the owner of a manufactured home, any fines assessed pursuant to 292 subsections (b)(i) and (b)(ii) above shall be imposed on the owner of the home. 293 294 (c) Reporting and record-keeping requirements. Enforcement of reporting and record-keeping 295 requirements shall be as follows: 296 297 i. Provision of lease records. If the owner of a land-lease community fails to provide a lease 298 record before July 1 of the year, a fine pursuant to Appendix F-Fees and Fines may be 299 assessed on the owner of the land lease community. 300 301 ii. Provision of office hours. The City of Dover may inspect the office of a land lease 302 community, and upon finding that hours are not posted, or a representative is not on 303 site during posted office hours, assess a fine pursuant to Appendix F-Fees and Fines. A 304 finding that a land lease community’s 24-hour emergency line is not functioning may 305 also be cause to assess the same fine. 306 307 iii. Provision of receipts. If the owner of a manufactured home requests a receipt for 308 payment of rent from a land lease community owner or operator and does not receive 309 one within 2 days, the owner of the manufactured home may ask the City of Dover to 310 request the same. If a receipt is not provided to the city within an additional 7 days, a 311 fine pursuant to Appendix F-Fees and Fines may be assessed on the owner of the land 312 lease community. 313 314 (d) Official notice. As part of any fine assessed pursuant to Section 66-6, the City of Dover shall 315 give official notice to the violator. Policy and procedures for timing of official notices and 316 fines shall be developed by the planning and inspections department. 317 318 (e) Provisional order. When cumulative unresolved violations in a land lease community are 319 inimical to the public health, safety and general welfare so as to constitute a nuisance, and

Proposed Ordinance #2018-01-Ch 66, Appx B, Arts 3 & 12, and Appx F–Fees & Fines Page 8 320 the land lease community owner has not taken action to resolve the violations or cause the 321 appropriate parties to resolve the violations, the city may take action upon an owner's land 322 lease community operator license in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 26— 323 Businesses, Article II, Sections 26-59 through 26-65. 324 325 326 (Ord. No. 2016-16 , 8-8-2016) 327 328 Editor's note— Ord. No. 2016-16 , adopted August 8, 2016, in effect repealed § 66-5 and enacted a 329 new § 66-5 as set out herein. Former § 66-5 pertained to duties of mobile home park owners and derived 330 from Ord. of 2-23-1970 and the Code of 1981. 331 332 Sec. 66-6. - Anchoring and skirting. 333 334 Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any manufactured home not placed on a 335 permanent foundation, the manufactured home shall be firmly anchored to the ground and the open 336 space beneath the unit shall be skirted with approved material in accordance with the requirements of the 337 building inspector. 338 339 (Ord. of 9-13-1976; Code 1981, § 12-5; Ord. No. 2016-16 , 8-8-2016) 340 341 Sec. 66-7. - Use of city utilities. 342 343 The owner or occupant of any mobile home or manufactured home shall not be entitled to receive 344 city utilities until the license fee required in this chapter is paid in full, and city personnel shall refuse to 345 provide sewage, water and electricity to the mobile home or manufactured home until satisfactory proof 346 is furnished that such license fee has been paid. 347 348 (Ord. of 7-28-1975; Code 1981, § 12-6; Ord. No. 2016-16 , 8-8-2016) 349 350 Sec. 66-866-7. - Exemptions. 351 352 This chapter shall not apply to: 353 354 (1) Dealers. Unoccupied manufactured homes located on a dealer's display lot; or 355 356 (2) Manufactured homes in transit . Unoccupied manufactured homes temporarily occupying the 357 public right-of-way prior to placement on a lot or home site. 358 359 (Ord. of 2-23-1970, § 8; Code 1981, § 12-7; Ord. No. 2016-16 , 8-8-2016) 360 361 BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED: 362 363 That Appendix B - Zoning, Article 3 - District Regulations, Section 8 - Manufactured housing (MH) 364 zone, be amended by inserting the text indicated in bold, blue font and deleting the text indicated in red 365 strikeout as follows:

Proposed Ordinance #2018-01-Ch 66, Appx B, Arts 3 & 12, and Appx F–Fees & Fines Page 9 366 Section 8. - Manufactured housing (MH) zone.[2] 367 368 8.1 Uses permitted. In a manufactured housing zone, no building or premises shall be used, and no 369 building shall be erected, which is arranged, intended or designed to be used, in whole or in 370 part, for any uses, except the following: 371 372 8.11 Manufactured homes on individual lots, held in any type of ownership. 373 374 8.12 Multiple manufactured homes on a lot, provided that: 375 376 (a) The lot is operated as a condominium, including but not limited to condominiums 377 formed pursuant to 25 Del Code, Chapter 71; or 378 379 (b) The lot is operated as a land lease community; and 380 381 (c) There are at least 15 manufactured homes on the lot, or else sufficient home sites for 382 rent or sale on the lot to accommodate 15 manufactured homes. Such home sites 383 need not be expressly delineated but must be improved so as to be complete and 384 ready for occupancy by a manufactured home. There shall be no mixing of 385 manufactured homes and permanently placed manufactured homes on one lot. 386 387 8.13 Permanently placed manufactured homes on individual lots, provided that the home 388 and the lot are under common ownership. 389 390 8.14 Multiple permanently placed manufactured homes on a lot, provided that: 391 392 (a) The lot is operated as a condominium including but not limited to 393 condominiums formed pursuant to 25 Del Code, Chapter 71; or 394 395 (b) The lot is operated as a land lease community; and 396 397 (c) There are at least 15 permanently placed manufactured homes on the lot, or 398 else sufficient home sites for rent or sale on the lot to accommodate 15 399 permanently placed manufactured homes. Such home sites need not be 400 expressly delineated but must be improved so as to be complete and ready for 401 occupancy by a permanently placed manufactured home. There shall be no 402 mixing of manufactured homes and permanently placed manufactured homes 403 on one lot. 404 405 8.1315 One-family detached homes on individual lots, held in any type of ownership. 406 407 8.2 Conditional uses . Conditional uses shall be consistent with those conditionally permitted in 408 the one-family residence zones. 409 410 8.3 Accessory uses . Accessory uses shall be consistent with those permitted in the one-family 411 residence zones, with the following additions and exceptions:

Proposed Ordinance #2018-01-Ch 66, Appx B, Arts 3 & 12, and Appx F–Fees & Fines Page 10 412 8.31 Management facilities. The following shall be permitted accessory to lots providing home 413 sites for multiple manufactured homes: 414 415 (a) Management offices with rooms for the usual office furniture and supplies, limited 416 to one per lot; 417 418 (b) Storage space for utility connection supplies in quantity, manufactured home 419 accessories and maintenance materials and equipment; 420 421 (c) Laundry facilities equipped with washing machines and dryers; 422 423 (d) Community building facilities, including indoor recreation areas; 424 425 (e) Commercial establishments consistent with uses permitted in the C-1 neighborhood 426 commercial zone, limited to one such establishment per lot; 427 428 (f) One-family detached homes intended for the use of a manager or caretaker, limited 429 to one such dwelling per lot. 430 431 8.32 Accessory home occupations. Accessory home occupations shall be permitted consistent 432 with the conditions outlined for home occupations in the one-family residence zones, 433 with the exception that no home occupation shall be permitted if not also permitted by the 434 owner of the lot on which the home is sited. 435 436 8.4 Uses prohibited . The following uses are specifically prohibited: 437 438 8.41 Mobile homes, house trailers, and recreational vehicles as principal uses on a lot. Any 439 such structures or vehicles located within the zone and being used as dwellings shall upon 440 the effective date of this ordinance be deemed non-conforming uses in accordance with 441 article 7. 442 443 8.42 Any other kind of factory-built housing that does not meet the Manufactured Home 444 Construction and Safety Standards of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban 445 Development (HUD) Code as approved June 15, 1976, unless it can be demonstrated that 446 such housing is constructed to the standards of the Dover Code of Ordinances, Chapter 447 22, Buildings and Building Regulations. Any such housing located within the zone and 448 being used as dwellings shall upon the effective date of this ordinance be deemed non- 449 conforming uses in accordance with article 7. 450 451 8.5 Minimum occupation length . No lot or home site within the manufactured housing zone 452 reserved for occupation by a manufactured home shall be leased or occupied for residential use 453 except for periods of 30 consecutive days or more. 454 455 8.6 Land lease communities . The following regulations shall apply to land lease communities 456 within the MH zone: 457

Proposed Ordinance #2018-01-Ch 66, Appx B, Arts 3 & 12, and Appx F–Fees & Fines Page 11 458 8.61 Ownership. The entire land area occupied by a land lease community, regardless of the 459 number of home sites or individual lots therein, shall be maintained in single ownership, 460 or if in multiple ownership, under the provisions of the laws of the state dealing with unit 461 properties and condominiums. 462 463 8.62 Changes to site plan. After initial site development plan approval of a land lease 464 community, reapproval for the entire community shall not be required prior to the 465 issuance of building permits for alterations to individual manufactured homes, or their 466 accessory buildings such as storage areas and patios, which, in the judgement of the city 467 planner, do not materially alter the site development plan approval by the planning 468 commission and are requested as adjustments to the individual manufactured home sites 469 or lots leased by an individual family and designed for the convenience and comfort of 470 the individual lessee. 471 472 8.7 Performance Standards . All uses are subject to performance standards as set forth in article 5, 473 section 8. 474 475 8.8 Site development plan approval . Site development plan approval in accordance with article 10, 476 section 2 hereof shall be required prior to the issuance of building permits for the erection or 477 enlargement of all structures and related accessory structures. Such approval shall also be 478 required prior to the issuance of certificates of occupancy for a change of use. 479 480 8.81 For purposes of preparing a site development plan for approval by the planning 481 commission, and all subsequent improvements, alterations or additions, the applicant 482 shall conform to current submission requirements and site development standards as set 483 forth by the National Fire Protection Association publication 501A,"Standard for Fire 484 Safety Criteria for Manufactured Home Installations, Sites, and Communities." Where 485 applicable, the approving authority shall be the fire marshal's office. 486 487 8.82 No site development plan proposing the siting of a manufactured home outside of a land 488 lease community shall be approved unless the plan shows the manufactured home is to be 489 permanently placed, as defined in the Dover Code of Ordinances, Chapter 66— 490 Manufactured Homes, Mobile Homes, and Land Lease Communities. 491 492 8.9 Maximum density . The gross residential density in an MH zone shall not exceed six 493 dwelling units per acre. 494 495 8.10 Signs . Signs shall meet the regulations found in Article 5—Supplementary Regulations, 496 Section 4—Supplementary Sign Regulations. 497 498 (Ord. No. 2016-16 , 8-8-2016) 499 500 Footnotes: 501 --- (2) --- 502

Proposed Ordinance #2018-01-Ch 66, Appx B, Arts 3 & 12, and Appx F–Fees & Fines Page 12 503 Editor's note— Ord. No. 2016-16 , adopted August 8, 2016, in effect, repealed § 8 and enacted a new § 504 8 as set out herein. Former § 8 pertained to similiar subject matter and derived from Ord. of 10-13-1981; 505 Ord. of 3-20-1983; Ord. of 3-24-1986; Ord. of 7-10-2000; Ord. of 2-12-2001; Ord. of 4-28-2008(2); and 506 Ord. No. 2010-29, adopted January 10, 2011. 507 508 BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED: 509 510 That Appendix B - Zoning, Article 12 - Definitions, be amended by inserting the following definition in 511 its correct alphabetical order: 512 513 Permanently placed manufactured home means a factory-built housing unit designed and 514 constructed to meet the Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards of the U.S. 515 Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Code, and that has also been placed upon 516 a permanent, unmovable foundation. 517 518 BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED: 519 520 That Appendix F - Fees and Fines, be amended by inserting the text indicated in bold, blue font and 521 deleting the text indicated in red strikeout as follows: 522 523 Chapter 66. - Manufactured Homes, Mobile Homes, and Land Lease Communities 524 Chapter 66. Manufactured Homes, Mobile Homes, and Land Lease Fees and Fines Communities Sec. 66-2. Licenses Sec. 66-3. Manufactured and mobile homes $45.00 each license$50.00 Subsec. (a) Required feePlacement permit each one-time placement permit A fine of not less than $50.00 and a penalty fee of ten Subsec. (b) Payment; penalties percent per month shall accrue on the unpaid balance of the license fee Subsec. (c) License $45.00 each license annually Sec. 66-5. Duties of Land Lease Community Owners and Operators A fine of not less than $50.00 in addition to any charges Subsec. (c)(i) Failure to perform required duties imposed to cover cost of maintenance by the City Subsec. 66-5 (c)(ii) Cost of maintenance by the city $75.00 per hour for such work

Proposed Ordinance #2018-01-Ch 66, Appx B, Arts 3 & 12, and Appx F–Fees & Fines Page 13 that must be done to render the property in compliance with this article, plus a 15% administrative charge Sec. 66-6 Enforcement and penalties Subsec. (a) Licenses and permits Subsec. (i) Obtaining manufactured home licenses A fine of not less than $25.00 Subsec. (b) Land lease community maintenance requirements A fine of not less than $25.00 in addition to any charges imposed to cover the cost of maintenance by the City at $75.00 per hour for such Subsec. (i) Violations and penalties work that must be done to render the property in compliance with Chapter 66, Section 66-4, plus a 15% administrative charge Subsec. (c) Reporting and record-keeping requirements A fine of not less than $25.00 and a penalty fee of ten Subsec. (i) Provision of lease records percent per month shall accrue for each month the lease record is not provided A fine of not less than $25.00; the fine may be Subsec. (ii) Provision of office hours applied cumulatively or per violation instance A fine of not less than $25.00; the fine may be Subsec. (iii) Provision of receipts applied cumulatively or per violation instance 525 526 (Ord. No. 2016-16 , 8-8-2016) 527 528 ADOPTED: * 529 S:\ORDINANCES\2018\DRAFT\ORDINANCE #2018-01 CH 66, APPX B-ARTS 3 AND 12, AND APPX F\ORDINANCE #2018-01.wpd 530 531 SYNOPSIS 532 The proposed ordinance reorganizes and clarifies a portion of the updates to the Dover Code made in 533 August 2016 through Ordinance #2016-16. The proposed ordinance also brings the updates into 534 compliance with provisions of the Delaware Code related to manufactured housing and rental housing,

Proposed Ordinance #2018-01-Ch 66, Appx B, Arts 3 & 12, and Appx F–Fees & Fines Page 14 535 particularly Title 25, Chapters 53, 55, 70, and 71. The updates affected include requirements for placing 536 and licensing manufactured homes, standards for management and maintenance of land lease 537 communities, taxation, and code enforcement. A distinction is also made between manufactured homes 538 and permanently placed manufactured homes in the Zoning Ordinance. 539 540 (SPONSORS: NEIL AND HUGG) 541 542 Actions History 543 02/26/2018 - Scheduled for First Reading - City Council 544 02/13/2018 - Introduced - Council Committee of the Whole/Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee 545

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE The Council Committee of the Whole met on March 27, 2018 at 6:00 p.m., with Council President Slavin presiding (departed at 6:45 p.m. and returned at 6:47 p.m.). Members of Council present were Mr. Anderson (departed at 7:13 p.m. and returned at 7:15 p.m.), Mr. Sudler (arrived at 6:02 p.m.), Mr. Neil, Mr. Lewis (departed at 7:11 p.m. and returned at 7:13 p.m.), Mr. Cole (departed at 6:47 p.m. and returned at 6:48 p.m.), Mr. Polce (arrived at 6:04 p.m., departed at 7:02 p.m., returned at 7:04 p.m., departed at 7:52 p.m., and returned at 7:53p.m.), and Mr. Hare. Mr. Lindell was absent. Mayor Christiansen was also present (departed at 7:49 p.m.). Civilian members present for their Committee meetings were Mr. Garfinkel and Mr. Shelton (Safety Advisory and Transportation), Mrs. Doyle and Ms. Scarborough (Utility), and Mr. Shevock and Dr. Stewart (Legislative, Finance, and Administration). SAFETY ADVISORY AND TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE The Safety Advisory and Transportation Committee met with Chairman Lewis presiding. AGENDA ADDITIONS/DELETIONS Mr. Neil moved for approval of the agenda, seconded by Mr. Cole and unanimously carried. Presentation by the Dover/Kent County Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) - Final Report of the Downtown Dover Parking Study Mr. James Galvin, Principal Planner, Dover/Kent County Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), advised that completing the parking study had been a two-year process. He stated that it was a very involved process and he thought that they had come up with a good product. Mr. Spencer Finch, Project Manager and Sustainability Leader, Langan Engineering & Environmental Services, Inc., reviewed a presentation entitled “Downtown Dover Parking Study”, dated March 27, 2018, (Attachment #1). Referring to slide 32, Potential On-Street Parking Zone, he indicated that Loockerman Street, Zone 1, should probably have the highest parking rates because it is the prime real estate directly in front of the retail and most destinations. Mr. Finch explained that the blue areas, Zone 2, are the side streets which would provide slightly cheaper parking, and then the green areas, Zone 3, would be areas that are protected for residential. He stated that the Zone 3 areas would have no cost but there would need to be some caretaking to make sure that residents have those parking spots near the residential locations. Mr. Polce thanked Mr. Finch for providing members with a very thorough presentation. He expressed concern regarding the public survey, noting that six (6) to eight (8) responses was not a statistically sound sample size. Mr. Polce asked Mr. Finch to explain the methodology used to engage the public and gather feedback. Responding, Mr. Finch noted that they were disappointed in the response they received to the electronic survey as well. He advised that they held three (3) public meetings and the records of those meetings were also included in the report. Mr. Finch stated that, on average, there were typically between 20 - 40 people in attendance at those meeting and he thought that they did the best job they could in trying to reach out to as many people as they could. He advised that this was in addition to the stakeholder engagement that they did, noting that they reached out to every business within the project area, and others outside as well.

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING OF MARCH 27, 2018 PAGE 2 Mr. Anderson thanked Mr. Finch for the study and asked how he reconciles the idea that there is not a parking problem if there are 16% violations during the peak of the day, explaining that he thought that this indicated that there was a problem with parking in the areas where people want to be. In response, Mr. Finch clarified that the 16% violation was an issue that they spotted related to the parking surfers, explaining that at least 16% of the people parking on peak hours are exceeding the two-hour limits or parking where they’re not supposed to, which creates the problem. He indicated that people say that there is no parking downtown and that is because a lot of the parking is dedicated to permit parking, the parking lots where there is available public parking do not have clear directional signage so people do not know how to get there, and there are parking surfers taking up all the on-street parking instead of parking in a parking lot. Mr. Anderson stated that he was surprised that a parking app was not part of the recommendation. He noted that it would give people a picture of where the parking is and could be developed later on to include payments, and could even be connected to a calendar to show people upcoming events. Responding, Mr. Finch advised that they had looked at that idea and he thought that it was definitely something that the City and others could look at in the future. He stated that he thought that the cost of apps was coming down, and they had seen other communities take them on as a solution or an additional measure to enhance their parking situation. Mr. Finch advised that, right now, the clear message that they want to pass on is that there is some obvious low-hanging fruit that needs to be taken care of first. He explained that if a parking app were instituted now, it would not solve some of the other issues, like the parking surfer problem. Mr. Anderson noted that when Mr. Finch referred to short-term recommendations, it seemed obvious that those are items that could be implemented right away. He asked what Mr. Finch’s definitions are for medium- and long-term. In response, Mr. Finch indicated that Langan works with communities all over the mid-Atlantic and they know that funding, resources, and capacity are limited. He stated that their recommendation would be that short-term items are those that are really critical and should be addressed within a year if possible, medium-term might be one (1) to three (3) years, and long-term more than that. Mr. Finch advised that they realize that due to funding and capacity needs there may not be capacity to implement all of them, and there might be other reasons as well, for instance the community might have issues with one or another. He stated that they would suggest that the City pick three (3) short-term, three (3) medium-term, and three (3) long-term, maybe based on what the community and/or stakeholders want and try to focus on those. Mr. Anderson noted that discussions regarding permit parking and moving people around had always created a great deal of interest among stakeholders in the past. He indicated that some of the parking spaces are contractual, like E-ZPass, and asked if they were part of the discussion and had provided input. Responding, Mr. Finch stated that they definitely were, noting that they reached out and talked to all of them. He advised that they know that no one wants to pay more and that is the first gut reaction that most people have. Mr. Finch explained that if you go someplace and purchase your seat in advance, you might pay $100 and the person whom you sit next to might have paid $1,000, and you get the free benefits as a part of that. He stated that one (1) of the things that they noticed during the outreach is that the public is willing to have that kind of graduated payment in regard to different parking rates, and their short-term recommendation is to start looking at that from the permit parking perspective.

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING OF MARCH 27, 2018 PAGE 3 Mr. Finch advised that they know that this is a difficult issue and that there are some permits that are locked into long-term lease agreements; however, he suggested that they could start talking to E-ZPass and others who have lease agreements, and maybe they would be willing to shift some of their needs to a farther lot. He stated that when they performed the traffic counts they noticed that many of the permit parking lots sit vacant, explaining that although the permits are paid for, the lots are not being used to full capacity. Mr. Finch indicated that if the City started adjusting the pricing strategy, the lease holders would pay more for those who need to be there every day, and they may not use as many spaces, which would release capacity for others. He stated that there is a price distortion because everything is so cheap, explaining that it’s easier for somebody to just buy the permit, even if they’re not using it, and it’s easier for a parking surfer to move their car around in off-street parking every two (2) hours because it’s free. Mr. Finch noted, however, that it has created a huge cost on the retailers on Loockerman Street because when people drive down Loockerman Street and cannot find parking, they drive away and never come back. He stated that these behaviors are creating a huge disadvantage for downtown Dover. Mr. Neil stated that he believes in synergy. Referring to the gateways and signage, he indicated that the City has an opportunity for synergy not only with the Downtown Dover Partnership (DDP), which has control of certain parking lots, but also with Kent County Tourism, of which he is pleased to sit on the board. Mr. Neil stated that these groups were looking at the same things and he thought they need to be linked. He noted that Expedia, the travel website, had recommended Dover as a weekend getaway because of the efforts of Kent County Tourism, and the signage that affects parking affects the people coming from out of the state and the people who live here. Mr. Neil stated that he thought that the report was terrific. He noted that there is a need to get all of the players involved to make this work for Dover and continue to build the city. Mr. Garfinkel stated that he thought it was an excellent report. He noted that it is not really a predictive study; however, it mentions growth and, as he understood it, while there was not a current need for a vertical parking garage yet, there may be in the future if the recommendations are implemented. He asked if Mr. Finch was saying that if the City follows the recommendations, they will draw more consumers to downtown, which would then draw more people who want to develop downtown. Responding, Mr. Finch confirmed that this was one (1) of the messages from the report. Mr. Slavin, referring to slide 5 depicting the available parking downtown, recalled that Mr. Finch had apologized for the confusion on this slide. He thanked Mr. Finch for his work and stated that he did not mean to demean it; however, this slide portrayed the exact problem, which is that it does not make sense to anyone. Mr. Slavin advised that we can count spaces and do a tabletop exercise, and move this checker here and that one there, but at the end of the day we end up with that. He stated that, although it wasn’t within the purview of the study, he thought it was really critical that some of the most valuable real estate from an economical development perspective is being dedicated to surface parking, which is sometimes achieving 60% in capacity. Mr. Slavin stated that if the City built a vertical parking garage as the solution, as he believes the City should, it could open those properties for development and attract the new businesses that require new spaces. He stated that the benefit would be more ratable property downtown, and the parking garage would pay for itself in the long term probably two (2) times over on a payback period. Mr. Slavin noted that members would continue to hear him ask for a parking garage downtown until one is built, explaining that he thought it was an obligation of the city government to provide this for the infrastructure downtown, just like building libraries and police stations.

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING OF MARCH 27, 2018 PAGE 4 Mr. Sudler asked if the respondent pool of 20 or 40 people was strictly from the City of Dover, Kent County, or outside of the City limits and whether they had live data to support it. Responding, Mr. Finch advised that if members review the sign-in sheets, most of the individuals that responded are either residents or work in downtown Dover. He stated that there were only one (1) or two (2) people from outside the area that they noted at each of the three (3) public outreach meetings. Mr. Sudler asked whether the majority worked or lived in Dover. In response, Mr. Finch stated that he thought that there was a good mix. He advised that some public meetings had more people who worked in Dover and some had more who resided in Dover. Mr. Sudler asked what perplexities may arise in relation to the largest sized parking lot presented in the study from the perspectives of the Delaware Department of Transportation (DelDOT), future plans, or economic growth for the City of Dover. Responding, Mr. Finch stated that what they looked at in each of the scenarios was really what would happen to traffic patterns downtown if you located bigger public destination parking at different lots. He advised that they looked at opening up some of the capacity to public parking on North and Loockerman Streets and expanding the Bradford Street lot or building a parking garage there. Mr. Finch stated that if the development was on Bradford Street or Governors Avenue, some of the traffic patterns would be simplified because they are easier to reach from Loockerman Street and different directions. He noted that there are larger capacity streets, this was only a schematic analysis, and they just looked at traffic patterns in general and did not do specific counts. In response to Mr. Sudler, Mr. Finch advised that they did not cross-reference with DelDOT when they looked at the traffic patterns. He stated that this would be done if the decision was made to further develop a parking lot or other facilities. Mr. Sudler asked, in regard to the Langan psychological assessment, what the overall reasons were that people feel uncomfortable about parking on New Street, and whether their concerns were related to lighting, the element of people who live on that street, visible or alleged drug or criminal activity, or the past reputation or stigma associated with that street. He asked if these concerns also applied to connecting streets, such as Reed, Kirkwood, and Queen Streets. Responding, Mr. Finch advised that they had heard all of these concerns from all stakeholders and the public. He noted that, while doing a field review, they personally witnessed police activity on New Street, and there was constant mention of issues with the liquor store when they were there. Mr. Finch stated that he thought that a lot of concerns related to perception, noting that younger individuals may be more comfortable walking to their cars even at night, while others who might need a little assistance, have a disability, or may not be walking to their cars in a group, have issues with walking longer distances, especially to the Governors Avenue lot. Mayor Christiansen commended Mr. Finch on the work done and expressed appreciation. He indicated that he shared the opinion expressed by Mr. Slavin that a parking garage was the ultimate solution. Mayor Christiansen stated that he was not an expert but had memories that parking was an issue in downtown Dover when he was five (5) years old and when he was first elected to Council at the age of 32, and he noted that it is still an issue. He advised that he concurred that the City would have to be unique and dynamic in its solution. Mayor Christiansen advised that Bayhealth Medical Center had issues with parking and had grabbed the bull by the horns. He stated that Bayhealth’s parking issues seemed to disappear and the garage was working out very well, although

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING OF MARCH 27, 2018 PAGE 5 they still have quite a bit of surface parking. Mayor Christiansen indicated that he agreed that signage could be better; however, he stated that, looking toward the future of downtown Dover and the City of Dover, he would rather expend money for a parking garage and affordable parking than signs. Mr. Finch stated that he thought the City was looking at a chicken and egg problem regarding what would come first to attract development downtown, noting that they would be glad to look at where members feel the threshold is. He stated that, in the case of Bayhealth, they had a demand and it made sense to build the garage. Mr. Finch advised that if the demand showed up, a garage was definitely something that could be looked at. Mayor Christiansen stated that if we build it, they will come. Mr. Lewis commended Mr. Finch on the report. Responding to Mr. Lewis, Mr. Finch stated that enforcement should also be looked at. He noted that if any of the rules for parking change, such as wayfinding, rates, or better enforcement of current regulations, enforcement will be required to change behavior. Mr. Finch stated that parking surfers are currently skirting the rules and are not getting caught often enough. He stated that they had talked to the police and resources were limited, noting that there were ways to use resources better. Mr. Finch suggested implementing changes, educating, and then enforcing to make sure that the changes are sticking. Mr. Neil noted that members would certainly have more to consider regarding the report and how they will proceed; however, he recommended acceptance of the report. Mr. Neil moved to recommend acceptance of the final report from the MPO, seconded by Mr. Anderson and unanimously carried. Briefing on Dover/Kent County Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) Projects Mr. James Galvin, Principal Planner, Dover/Kent County Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), introduced Mr. Reed Macmillan, Executive Director of the MPO. Mr. Macmillan stated that this was his 150th day in his new capacity as Executive Director. He informed members that he had worked from 1999-2002 for Kent County Levy Court in their Planning Services Department and recently retired from New Castle County. Mr. Galvin informed members that the MPO was currently preparing its Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) for 2019-2022 and several projects located in Dover were included in the State Capital Transportation Program (CTP), including a proposal to look at the intersection of Forest Street (SR8) and Saulsbury Road (SR15). He expressed his belief that this project had been contracted out, with funding for preliminary engineering and right-of-way for the coming fiscal year and construction in 2021, and noted that there would be changes at that intersection fairly soon. Mr. Galvin advised that they were studying the expansion of Saulsbury Road to two (2) lanes in each direction from Forrest Avenue to College Road or beyond, depending on study results. He advised that, although this project did not currently show up in the CTP, it may come up. Mr. Galvin explained that the Loockerman Street/Forest Street Improvements project was in the CTP and progressing, with preliminary engineering this year, right-of-way next year, and construction in 2021. He stated that the Route 13 expansion to three (3) lanes in each direction from

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING OF MARCH 27, 2018 PAGE 6 Puncheon Run to Lochmeath Way, just below the Lowe’s store, would go to construction in 2021 to 2022. Mr. Galvin noted that the other portion of this project, from Lochmeath to Woodside, is a year or two (2) behind and, although that area is not in the City, it would be an important change. Mr. Galvin stated that new projects that are important to the City had been put in the CTP this year. He noted that there was a proposal to build a Dunkin Donuts and other office space on Forrest Avenue across from the Modern Maturity Center. Mr. Galvin explained that the MPO’s Delaware 8 Concept Plan and Operations Study, which was released in 2008, included a proposal for a small connector road, probably a local road, connecting Route 8 to Commerce Way at the Beiser Boulevard warehouse buildings and to Food Lion at Gateway West. He stated that this project was in the CTP for the out-years, with preliminary engineering in 2021 and 2022. Mr. Galvin explained that because there would be construction at the Dunkin Donuts site, the State’s hand had been forced and they would be looking at this project in the near future. Mr. Galvin stated that Scarborough Road C-D Roads project would extend behind Dover Mall and connect to Dover Downs, Leipsic Road, and the exit from Route 1. He explained that this would be an alternative way to get from the Route 1 exit to Dover Mall and Dover Downs without having to go on Route 13. Mr. Galvin indicated that the State would be looking at this project and doing preliminary engineering in 2021 or 2022, with more intensive looks, right-of-way, and construction occurring in the years beyond. Mr. Galvin advised that College Road reconstruction was included in the CTP; however, there were no items in the time period of the TIP. He explained that the MPO’s TIP goes out to 2022 and the CTP goes out to 2024 and the CTP included funding in the out-years for College Road. Mr. Galvin noted that the MPO had done a bike study, which was an important part of College Road. He advised that College Road does not have any sidewalks on the portion from Kenton Road to McKee Road and expressed his belief that this area will receive the same treatment that Walker Road previously received. Mr. Galvin stated that there was funding for the Crawford Carroll Road Extension behind Lowe’s, noting that the road would extend to parking lots of the commercial enterprises along Route 13 but not all the way to Delaware State University. He indicated that right-of-way acquisition was planned for this year and next year, with construction in 2021 and 2022. Mr. Galvin stated that the West Dover Connector was complete and the State was currently studying Kenton Road. He advised that at the latest public workshop for Kenton Road, they were looking at a roundabout at the corner of Chestnut Grove Road and Kenton Road instead of a stop sign, to avoid delays. Mr. Galvin explained that a large amount of traffic comes from out of town on Kenton Road in the morning, and a roundabout would be a way to keep traffic moving. Mr. Galvin advised that the State was looking at West Street from New Burton Road to North Street, explaining that there are no sidewalks on this stretch and there is a need for bike lanes. He noted that there would be preliminary engineering for this project in 2021 and 2022, with right-of-way acquisition in 2022. Mr. Anderson noted that not having an interchange off Route 1 for the Garrison Oak Technology Park had cost the City a fair number of jobs and asked if there were any thoughts on this. Mr. Galvin stated that he had not seen anything to indicate that the Delaware Department of

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING OF MARCH 27, 2018 PAGE 7 Transportation (DelDOT) was looking at this. He noted that there is currently a partial interchange at Route 8, and DelDOT would be hard pressed to have another interchange essentially one (1) major street north of that. Mr. Galvin stated that the MPO had looked at the possibility of running some kind of road behind, from Leipsic down to White Oak. He stated his belief that there had always been a proposal to run a connector road from Route 8 somewhere along the right-of-way of Route 1 to get to White Oak Road, so that there would be a connection from the highway to the industrial park. He indicated that he had not heard about this in quite a while and suggested making sure that DelDOT knows that the City is interested in an interchange, if this is the case. Update - Safety Issues at the Library Mr. Lewis suggested deferring this matter since Mr. Lindell had requested it and was unfortunately unable to attend the meeting. Mr. Neil moved to defer consideration of this matter, seconded by Mr. Anderson. Mr. Polce noted that library staff was present and suggested that they be allowed the opportunity to provide an update. Mr. Lewis asked the library staff if they could email members a written update regarding safety issues at the library. As a point of order, Mr. Sudler suggested that the motion to defer be rescinded. Mr. Neil agreed to rescind the motion; however, Mr. Anderson stated that he was not willing to rescind. The motion to defer consideration of this matter carried by a roll call vote of six (6) yes (Anderson, Neil, Lewis, Slavin, Garfinkel, and Shelton), four (4) no (Sudler, Cole, Polce, and Hare), and one (1) absent (Lindell). Mr. Sudler moved for adjournment of the Safety Advisory and Transportation Committee meeting, seconded by Mr. Neil and unanimously carried. Meeting adjourned at 7:08 p.m. UTILITY COMMITTEE The Utility Committee met with Chairman Cole presiding. AGENDA ADDITIONS/DELETIONS Mr. Sudler moved for approval of the agenda, seconded by Mr. Lewis and unanimously carried. Presentation - Electric Rate Design and Cost of Services Study Mrs. Donna Mitchell, City Manager, reminded members Burns & McDonnell did the City’s rate design and cost of services study for years; however, this study was done by a new firm, NewGen Strategies & Solutions, given the concerns of the City’s electric rates with some of the customers for next fiscal year. She advised that this was a preliminary report which would be finalized and

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING OF MARCH 27, 2018 PAGE 8 brought back with the rates at the budget hearings. Mrs. Mitchell noted that there would also be discussions with the City’s customers regarding the study. Mr. Joe Mancinelli, General Manager, Energy Practice, NewGen Strategies & Solutions, reviewed a presentation entitled “City of Dover - Cost of Service and Rate Design Study”, dated March 27, 2018 (Attachment #2). Mr. Slavin thanked Mr. Mancinelli for the presentation and cautioned members to heed Mr. Mancinell’s words about the difference between using percentages and raw dollars at times. Mr. Slavin explained that someone could walk away thinking that their electric bill is going up 5% this year, when that person’s electric bill will go up $12 over the course of the year if they’re a low user. He advised that members need to make sure their messaging is as synced up as the rest of this study and that they know what their talking points are as they roll this out. Responding to Mr. Anderson, Mr. Mancinelli confirmed that they are looking at averaging this over a five-year time period. Mr. Anderson asked what year the 2% change in residential rates would take effect. In response, Mr. Mancinelli explained that the amounts listed under the proposed column on each slide depict the rates that would become effective this year. He advised that the Power Cost Adjustment (PCA) that is in there, the .0038 for the Purchase Power Agreement (PPA), is an average amount that the City can afford to give back based on the forecast to the extent that it is different. Mr. Mancinelli explained that the current PCA is much higher and, to the extent that it is different in July, members would see a different effective increase. He stated that the Phase 2 and Phase 3 rates are not included in the presentation. Mr. Mancinelli noted that he thought that the proposal would be to eventually ask for approval of just Phase 1 and then see how the future plays out. He advised that the cost of service is based on the cost of serving the customer class over the entire five (5) years and is the same for every class. Mr. Sudler asked, in regard to the residential class, if there were any concerns regarding the City’s infrastructure impeding the positive outcome of the City’s profit rate that can be addressed in the short term. Responding, Mr. Mancinelli stated that the design of the system does impact the cost; however, they have not looked at the design to determine if it could be different or should be different. He advised that it is serving its purpose now, and they only looked at the cost. Rojan Meadows Sanitary Sewer Territory Transference Members were advised that, in 2003, the Rojan Meadows subdivision was proposed within the City of Dover. The development went through the City’s Development Advisory Committee (DAC) and received initial approval from the Planning Commission. The original intent of this development was to install gravity sanitary sewer mains and a pump station that would be dedicated to the City of Dover. The project was tabled in 2010 and Rojan Meadows did not receive final approval from the City of Dover. The developer has revived this project and is intent on obtaining final approval for the Rojan Meadows development and one (1) aspect of the final approval is to provide sanitary sewer service to all proposed lots. The proposal is to transfer the sanitary sewer territory of the Rojan Meadows subdivision, and any adjacent lots to be served by this system, to Kent County for

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING OF MARCH 27, 2018 PAGE 9 ownership and maintenance. Mrs. Sharon Duca, Public Works Director/City Engineer, reviewed the background and analysis for this item. Staff recommended granting conditional approval to transfer the Rojan Meadows sanitary sewer territory to Kent County pending the developer’s ability to obtain all necessary approvals and authorizations as required by the City. Mr. Hare moved to recommend granting conditional approval to transfer the Rojan Meadows sanitary sewer territory to Kent County pending the developer’s ability to obtain all necessary approvals and authorizations as required by the City, as recommended by staff. The motion was seconded by Mr. Lewis. Mr. Anderson asked if the User Agreement modification should be based on Kent County standards since the county has everything to do with this, including running and maintaining the pump station, or if it has to be run on the standards for the City system. Responding, Mrs. Duca explained that the changes that have to be made to the User Agreement specifically relate to how flow is determined at the Dover East Pump Station since part of the City flow still goes into there. She stated that currently there is only a deduction for the mobile homes that the County flows into the Dover East Pump Station, and the agreement would have to allow for appropriate calculations for single-family residences to go through, so that the City would be receiving the appropriate deduction from the total flow from the station which determines what will be charged. Mr. Anderson asked if that requirement would be based on the County or City requirements. In response, Mrs. Duca advised that the County code specifically identifies what an equivalent dwelling unit (EDU) is for a mobile home versus a single-family and the City only references the equivalent of a single-family; however, they do coincide with each other. In response to Mr. Neil, Mrs. Duca advised that if there are any costs related to the transference of the Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity (CPCN), they would have to be borne by the developer. The motion to recommend granting conditional approval to transfer the Rojan Meadows sanitary sewer territory to Kent County pending the developer’s ability to obtain all necessary approvals and authorizations as required by the City, as recommended by staff, was unanimously carried. Mr. Sudler moved for adjournment of the Utility Committee meeting. The motion was seconded by Mr. Neil and unanimously carried. Meeting adjourned at 7:59 p.m. LEGISLATIVE, FINANCE, AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE The Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee met with Chairman Hare presiding. AGENDA ADDITIONS/DELETIONS Mr. Neil moved for approval of the agenda, seconded by Mr. Lewis and unanimously carried.

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING OF MARCH 27, 2018 PAGE 10 Status of Other Post-Employment Benefits (OPEB) and Pension Funds Due to time constraints, this item was deferred during the meeting of March 13, 2018. Mrs. Donna Mitchell, City Manager, reviewed the General Pension, Other Post-Employment Benefits (OPEB) - Retirement Health Insurance, and Police Pensions Post Retirement Benefit Liabilities as of July 1, 2017 for the Plan Year June 30, 2019. She stated that the General Pension unfunded liability total is down to $20M and is funded at 67.1% in total, noting that in FY 16 it was funded at 60.7%, so it is up 7% in funding, which is very good. Mrs. Mitchell advised that the report also included the percentages that have to be put into payroll to put the actuarially determined contribution into the plans each year. Referring to the General Fund, she advised that the normal cost is 4.21% in total, the amortization of the unfunded liability and the interest cost is 44.05%, for a total of 48.26%, which she separated out so members could see how much the unfunded liability is costing the City each year as a percentage of payroll. Mrs. Mitchell noted that, in total, the percentage of payroll for the General Fund is 58% versus 29% for the Electric Fund, explaining that the City is more fully funded with the Electric Fund than the General Fund. Mrs. Mitchell stated that the OPEB - Retirement Health Insurance is 41.9% funded in liability, which has improved from FY 16 when it was funded at 33.7%. She advised that the City had a lot of help in the last year with the market improving the investments. Mrs. Mitchell noted that the actuarially determined contribution for OPEB is 13.7% for the General Fund, 2.20% for the Water/Wastewater Fund, and 2.00% for the Electric Fund, for a total of 6.4%. She explained that a lot of that percentage is driven by the police because they can retire earlier. Mrs. Mitchell advised members that the City has to put a flat lump sum amount into the City of Dover Police Pension Plan and the City is also part of the State of Delaware Police Pension Plan. She noted that the City of Dover Police Pension Plan had improved 10% from last year, increasing from 63% to 73% funded. Mrs. Mitchell advised that the Police Pension percentage of payroll is 16.68%. Project Carry-Forward Budget Balances and Proposed Ordinance #2018-02 - FY 2017-2018 Budget Ordinances - First Amendment Due to time constraints, this item was deferred during the meeting of March 13, 2018. Mrs. Donna Mitchell, City Manager, reviewed the background and analysis for the project carry-forward budget balances and Proposed Ordinance #2018-02 - FY 2017-2018 Budget Ordinances - First Amendment. She explained that the proposed budget amendments bring forward the carry-forward balances from last fiscal year as well as projects carried forward, and any other adjustments that have been made during the year. Staff recommended approval of the proposed budget amendments for Fiscal Year 2018 and adoption of Ordinance #2018-02. In response to Mr. Sudler, Mrs. Mitchell repeated that the transfer to the Parkland Reserve included $2,809 from Mr. Sudler’s Parkland Revitalization fundraising.

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING OF MARCH 27, 2018 PAGE 11 Mr. Neil, referring to Proposed Ordinance #2018-02 - FY 2017-2018 Budget Ordinances - First Amendment, page 1, General Fund, Cash Receipt Summary for 2017-2018, asked for additional details regarding how the $1.47M increase from the original budget to the revised budget happened. Responding, Mrs. Mitchell explained that $214,000 was revenues that came in over budget, $1.1M was the departmental expenses, more than $600,000 of which was from attrition for vacant positions, wages and benefits, there were also materials and supplies, and all of the other expenses came in under budget. She stated, for example, that the Customer Service Department was $204,000, reminding members that Council approved additional staff; however, it took a while to get those additional employees onboard. Mrs. Mitchell advised that some of the larger amounts included Grounds Maintenance at $159,000 and Streets at $126,000, $80,000 of which she put back in next year. She explained that it was pretty much the attrition and savings in the departments’ expenses. Mr. Slavin stated that he did not believe that Mrs. Mitchell had answered Mr. Neil’s question, indicating that the answer was because the City and members are good at what they do now, Mrs. Mitchell is good at what she does, and the Finance Department is good at what they do. He noted that they are also transparent and there is a higher degree of trust among all of them as colleagues than there had been at any time that he had been on Council, so the numbers they were hearing are true numbers that they can rely on. Mr. Lewis moved to recommend approval of the proposed budget amendments for Fiscal Year 2018 and adoption of Ordinance #2018-02, as recommended by staff. The motion was seconded by Mr. Shevock and unanimously carried. Grant Application Procedure Revisions Ms. Lori Peddicord, Controller/Treasurer, advised members that during a recent US Department of Justice (USDOJ) grant monitoring visit regarding Police Department grants, the City was requested to revise City of Dover Grant Application Procedure No. 317 and the Police Department General Order 17 Budget & Purchasing Procedures to add some additional controls and procedures to monitor sub awards and subrecipient grant funding. Ms. Peddicord reviewed the proposed procedure revisions (Attachment #3). Staff recommended approval of the procedure revisions as requested. Mr. Neil moved to recommend approval of staff’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Anderson and unanimously carried. Diversity and Inclusion Study Request for Proposal (RFP) Due to time constraints, this item was deferred during the meeting of March 13, 2018. A Request for Proposal (RFP) for Diversity and Inclusion was issued on October 31, 2017 with a bid opening on November 29, 2017. Five (5) submissions were received. After the closing, the University of Delaware was contacted to determine their interest in the project. Following discussions with the University, they submitted their response on February 8, 2018. Mrs. Donna Mitchell, City Manager, advised members Mrs. Kim Hawkins, Human Resources Director, had reviewed all of the proposals and all of them had come in over budget. Mrs. Mitchell stated that she had moved money in Proposed Ordinance #2018-02 - FY 2017-2018 Budget Ordinances - First Amendment to cover this expense if Council desires to move forward with the

COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING OF MARCH 27, 2018 PAGE 12 study. She stated that she felt that Kaleidoscope Group from Chicago was the best and most qualified and their proposal, in the amount of $97,400, would cover the City’s needs. Staff recommended authorizing funding up to $97,400 to support the full scope of the RFP. Mr. Sudler moved to recommend approval of staff’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Slavin and unanimously carried. Mr. Neil moved for adjournment of the Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee meeting. The motion was seconded by Mr. Shevock and unanimously carried. Meeting adjourned at 8:14 p.m. Mr. Anderson moved for adjournment of the Council Committee of the Whole meeting. The motion was seconded by Mr. Sudler and unanimously carried. Meeting adjourned at 8:14 p.m. Timothy A. Slavin Council President TAS/TM/dd S:\AGENDAS-MINUTES-PACKETS-PRESENTATIONS-ATT&EXH\Committee-Minutes\2018\03-27-2018 CCW Minutes.wpd Attachments Attachment #1 - A presentation entitled “Downtown Dover Parking Study”, dated March 27, 2018, provided by Mr. Spencer Finch, Project Manager and Sustainability Leader, Langan Engineering & Environmental Services, Inc. Attachment #2 - A presentation entitled “City of Dover - Cost of Service and Rate Design Study”, dated March 27, 2018, provided by Mr. Joe Mancinelli, General Manager, Energy Practice, NewGen Strategies & Solutions Attachment #3 - Revised City of Dover Grant Application Procedure No. 317 and Police Department General Order 17 Budget & Purchasing Procedures

ATTACHMENT #1 Downtown Dover Council Committee of the Whole Meeting of 03/27/2018 Parking Study Presented to the Dover City Council March 27, 2018

Downtown WhatDover Parking Study is the Project? – “Too much?” – “Too little?” – “Too pricy?” – “Too cheap?” – “Easy to Understand?” – “Convenient to where I want to go?”

What is the Project? = approximately 6.5 acres

What is the Project? Private Parking Lots Take this much space Public Parking Lots Take this much space Off-Street Parking Takes this much space = approximately 6.5 acres

What is the Project?

Parking Count Findings • 1,762 total parking spaces • On-Street Parking (607 spaces) – Peak Hour – 12:30 to 1:30 pm – Peak Occupancy Rate – 75% – Peak Violation Rate – 16% • Off-Street Public Parking (459 spaces) – Peak Hour – 11 am – Noon – Peak Occupancy Rate – 63%

Peak Occupancy Per Lot 63% 62% 21% 83% 65% 84%

ISSUES What is the Project? – Not easy to understand – Cost of Parking – Perception of Safety – Sense of Place

Cost of DOVER Parking: Wilmington (Per Hour / On Street) Newark Annapolis, MD Media, PA

Cost of DOVER Parking: Wilmington (Per Day / 12 x Public Lots) Newark 8x Annapolis, MD 13 x Media, PA

Current DOVER Cost of Parking DAILY: (Per Day / Public Lots) (For 2 Hours / On-Street)

Current Newark Cost of Parking DAILY: (Per Day / Public Lots) (Per Hour / On-Street)

PUBLIC What isOUTREACH the Project? – 3 Public Meetings – Newspaper Coverage – Online Survey

Questions from Public Outreach: How Would You Spend Your ? Quick Errand , but 20 mins only to Downtown Dover / hr, Off-Street All day, Off-Street Day-long Stay All day, On-Street, but moving car every 2 hours All day, On-Street

MORE FOR 2-hour PARKING ON-STREET ON-STREET EVEN MORE THAN $4 FOR ON-STREET

Potential Improvement Scenario 1 STRATEGY: Shift some permit parking to Bradford and Governor’s Avenue Lots, Open Up Loockerman Way (or North Street) Lot to public parking

Potential Improvement Scenario 2 STRATEGY: New State Street Alley Lot offers approximately 44 new parking spaces.

Potential Improvement Scenario 3 STRATEGY: Shift some permit parking to Bradford and Governor’s Avenue Lots, Increase size of Bradford Street Lot, Open Up Loockerman Way (or North Street) Lot to public parking

Potential Improvement Scenario 4 STRATEGY: Shift some permit parking to Bradford and Governor’s Avenue Lots, Open Up Loockerman Way (or North Street) Lot to public parking, then build Bradford Street Garage for both Public and Permit Parking.

How Would You Spend Your ? Scenario 1 Less than $100k Scenario 2 $1M to $2M Scenarios 1 and 2 $1M to $2M Scenario 3 $1M to $2M Scenarios 2 and 3 $2M to $4M Scenario 4 Over $10 M

FUTURE DEVELOPMENT SCENARIOS What is the Project? Land Use Number of Parking Spots Required Original Demand Scenario 1 – Scenario 2 – Scenario 3 – Model Residential Residential Residential and Growth, no new Growth, new Office Growth, parking parking according new parking to zoning according to zoning Commercial 414 414 414 414 Office/Industrial 823 823 823 1,107 Residential 260 688 688 688 TOTAL 1,498 1,925 1,925 2,209 Existing Supply 1,762 1,762 2,082 2,415 Calculated Raw Peak 85% 109% 92% 91% Occupancy Calculated Time of Day / 60% 79% 67% 58% Parking Type Peak Occupancy

CONCLUSIONS What is the Project? – Inefficient distribution of parking capacity • Some lots over 80% occupancy • Some lots below 40% – Confusing wayfinding – Long-range planning –BUT, very important: willingness of public to try something NEW

RECOMMENDATIONS What is the Project? – Short-Term – Medium-Term – Long-Term

Short-Term Recommendations What is the Project? LOW-HANGING FRUIT 1. Wayfinding – Parking Lot Directional Signage 2. Wayfinding – Private Parking Lot Signage allowing evening public parking 3. Pilot One-Year New Pricing 4. Reconfigure existing lots (paint) 5. Shop owner / employee program to discourage on- street parking 6. Incentive campaign

Medium-Term Recommendations What is the Project? 1. Wayfinding – Downtown Dover Destination and WELCOME Signage 2. Metered Parking on Loockerman Street 3. Pilot second phase of pricing strategy 4. Streetscape and lighting improvements 5. Promote Alternative Transportation Options 6. Pay by cell phone

Long-Term Recommendations What is the Project? 1. NEW GATEWAY to Downtown Dover 2. Long-Term Visitor Promotion Program 3. New State Street Alley Lot 4. New Parking Garage once development reaches critical mass

Wayfinding and Signage

Wayfinding and Signage

Potential On-Street Parking Zones

Streetscape and Safety

Gateways

Gateways

Gateways

New Technologies X Online Payments Smart Meters In-Car Meters Kiosk Meters Car Sharing Pay by Phone Solar PV Bike Sharing and more…

Potential Cost Range of Improvements Short Term (Low-Hanging Fruit): 1. Wayfinding – Parking Lot Directional Signage – $42k (Grant applciation submitted – DDP) 2. Wayfinding – Private Parking Lot Signage allowing evening public parking – est. $2k - $5k (PPP) 3. Pilot One-Year New Pricing – No cost 4. Reconfigure existing lots (paint) – est. $2k - $15k (DDP) 5. Shop owner / employee program to discourage on-street parking – No cost 6. Incentive campaign – None to $5k

Potential Cost Range of Improvements Medium Term: 1. Wayfinding – Downtown Dover Destination and WELCOME Signage – est. $50k (DelDOT?) 2. Metered Parking on Loockerman Street – est. $30k - $60k 3. Pilot second phase of pricing strategy – No cost 4. Streetscape and lighting improvements , including NEW CONNECTOR ALLEY – cost not estimated, but probably in the $100k - $400k range 5. Promote Alternative Transportation Options – est. $0 to $10k 6. Pay by cell phone – est. $50k + monthly fee to service provider

Potential Cost Range of Improvements Long Range: 1. NEW GATEWAYS to Downtown Dover – cost not estimated, but probably in the $100k - $400k range per gateway created / enhanced 2. Long-Term Visitor Promotion Program – cost not estimated 3. New State Street Alley Lot – cost not estimated, but probably in the $500k + range 4. New Parking Garage once development reaches critical mass – cost not estimated, but likely more than $10 million

VISION Dover is on its way to becoming a vital destination, a great place to be, work, live, and play. Parking can be used more efficiently Wayfinding will help parking – but also help Dover’s sense of place and community Streetscape, lighting, and Gateways will help build on that Pricing strategy can help parking work better Communicate, communicate, communicate

THANK YOU! For more information, please contact: Eddie Diaz, City of Dover ediaz@dover.de.us James Galvin, Dover/Kent County MPO James.Galvin@doverkentmpo.org Spencer Finch, Langan Engineering sfinch@langan.com Paul Vernon, KSK pvernon@ksk1.com Technical Excellence Practical Experience Client Responsiveness

Technical Excellence Practical Experience Client Responsiveness

ATTACHMENT #2 Council Committee of the Whole Meeting of 03/27/2018 March 27, 2018 City of Dover – Cost of Service And Rate Design Study 1

Agenda • Cost of Service / Rate Design Overview • Revenue Requirement • Cost of Service • Rate Design – Rate Design Proposal • Proposed Rates and Rate Impacts • Discussion NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC 2

Cost of Service and Rate Design Overview

Steps in the Analytical Ratemaking Process Determine the revenue Revenue Requirement STEP 1 requirements of the utility Determination Unbundle costs by functions STEP 2 and services (production, transmission, distribution, etc.) Classify costs (demand, energy, STEP 3 customer costs, etc.) Cost Allocation Allocate cost among customer STEP 4 classes STEP 5 Design rates Rate Design NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC 4

Revenue Requirement

Revenue Requirement • Revenue Requirement based on five year “Test Year” (FY 2019 – FY 2023) – Rely on City’s financial forecast • Start with FY 2017 expenses • Cash basis – Includes system investments for capital – Recognizes existing reserve levels / policies – Budget projections for operating expenses • Includes TEA costs for future fuel / power NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC 6

Revenue Requirement ($000) Item 2017 Cash Adjustments Test Year Operation and Maintenance Expense Dover Production $7,150 $165 $7,315 PJM Purchased Power $36,256 $4,683 $40,939 Transmission & Distribution $5,285 $690 $5,975 Metering / Customer $1,447 $216 $1,662 Admin & General $4,432 $842 $5,274 Subtotal O&M Expenses $54,569 $6,596 $61,165 Debt Service $1,611 ($2) $1,609 Transfer to General Fund $10,000 $0 $10,000 Appropriations to Reserve Funds $11,402 ($5,050) $6,352 Subtotal Revenue Requirement $77,582 $1,544 $79,126 Less Other Income ($922) $134 ($788) Total Revenue Requirement $76,660 $1,678 $78,338 Revenue at Current Rates* $80,624 $2,112 $82,735 Over / (Under) $3,964 $4,397 Difference (%) 4.92% 5.31% NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC 7

Revenue Requirement Test Year Revenue Requirement by Cost by Function (%) Street Ligthing, Function ($000) Customer, 3% 0.1% Distribution, 13% Production $60,789 Transmission , Transmission $4,778 6% Distribution $9,802 Customer $2,943 Street Lighting $25 Total Cost of Service $78,338 Production , 77% Production Transmission Distribution Customer Street Ligthing NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC 8

Revenue Requirement Test Year Revenue Requirement by Cost Cost by Classification (%) Classification ($000) Customer , 6% Demand, 50% Demand Related Costs that vary with system capacity $39,092 Energy Costs that vary with energy (kWh) sold $34,868 Customer Costs that vary with number of customers $4,378 Total Cost of Service $78,338 Energy, 45% Demand Energy Customer NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC 9

Cost of Service

Cost of Service Total System Load by Month 200,000 150,000 kW 100,000 50,000 - Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Month System Peak Residential • 2017 System Peak ~ 162.8 MW • Peak in June, July, August, September • 4 CP Cost Allocator • Residential Class Peak ~ 66.6 MW • Peak in June, July, August, September • 4 NCP Cost Allocator NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC 11

Cost of Service – Test Year (Base Rates) % Cost of Current Proposed Change Service Revenues Difference Revenues Difference (f)= Class (a) (b) (c)=(b-a) (d) (e)=(c-a) (d/b)-1 Residential $28,937,503 $26,916,943 ($2,020,559) $27,468,331 ($1,469,171) 2% Small Commercial $4,073,885 $3,002,651 ($1,071,233) $3,057,524 ($1,016,361) 2% Medium Commercial $4,923,543 $5,308,542 $384,998 $5,056,954 $133,411 -5% Large Commercial $15,506,941 $18,197,969 $2,691,028 $16,944,837 $1,437,896 -7% Primary $15,681,040 $18,344,980 $2,663,940 $17,097,531 $1,416,490 -7% Transmission $8,220,137 $9,289,643 $1,069,506 $8,654,632 $434,495 -7% Other Tran $191,020 $421,017 $229,996 $391,884 $200,863 -7% Lighting $803,592 $1,208,940 $405,348 $1,208,940 $405,348 0% Total $78,337,661 $82,690,685 $4,353,024 $79,880,632 $1,542,972 -3.4% NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC 12

Cost of Service Average Cost of Service ($/kWh) $0.0000 $0.0200 $0.0400 $0.0600 $0.0800 $0.1000 $0.1200 $0.1400 $0.1600 Small Commercial $0.1522 Residential Service $0.1394 Medium Commercial $0.1105 Lighting $0.0987 Large Commercial $0.0957 Primary Service $0.0830 Transmission $0.0734 Cost of Service ($/kwh) Excludes PCA NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC 13

Rate Design

Rate Design Overview COS and Rate Making Cost of Service vs. Rate Making Cost accounting, allocate utility Policy decisions, used to incentivize costs with use, classification specific behavior, rates do not have to precisely match cost of service but should move towards COS Utility Functions: Power Supply Distribution Customer (Demand and (Demand and (Customer Energy Customer Components) Components) Components) NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC 15

Rate Design Overview Rate Making Best Practice • Align a utility’s costs with appropriate classifications (e.g. demand, energy, customer) – Costs categorized as fixed and variable • Rates should fairly reflect the cost of service, but policy should be considered • Rates should incentivize customers to use utility plant efficiently NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC 16

Rate Design Overview Objectives • Reduction in Revenue Requirement – Reduction contribution to reserves • Draw down Working Capital reserves through Purchased Power Adjustment (PPA) – Gradual decrease in PPA credit over 5 year period • Adjust class revenues to better align with cost causation • Implement changes over 5 year period – Rate changes for July 1 for FY19, FY21, FY23 – Rate change % are constant for each FY NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC 17

Rate Proposal

Rate Proposal – Residential Service Class Characteristics Residential Class Characteristics (Test Year) Class Meters: 21,187 Class Annual Sales (kWh): 207,590,560 Average Monthly Sales per Customer (kWh): 732 Average Monthly Demand per Customer (kW): 4.65 Average Monthly Load Factor (%): 26% NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC 19

Rate Proposal – Residential Service Phase I Rate Changes / Current Rates / COS Rates Item/Rate - Residential Current Proposed (Phase 1) COS Customer Charge ($/Month) $7.50 $8.46 $12.53 Energy Charge ($/kWh) $0.1203 $0.1206 $0.0466 Green Energy Charge - GEF ($/kWh) $0.00018 $0.00018 $0.00 PPA Charge ($/kWh) ($0.0086) ($0.0038) ($0.0038) Demand Charge ($/kW)* $0.00 $0.00 $16.89 Average Monthly Bill** $98.89 $103.94 Average Rate ($/kWh) $0.1211 $0.1273 $0.1356 Difference (%) 5.11% 11.93% * No Demand Charge for Residential Customers **Excludes Public Utility Tax Based on 2017 Billing Database Analysis NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC 20

Rate Proposal – Residential Service Rate Curve Analysis Accounts Current Proposed Cost of Service $0.1900 6000 $0.1800 5000 $0.1700 4000 NO. ACCOUNTS $0.1600 $/KWH $0.1500 3000 $0.1400 2000 $0.1300 1000 $0.1200 $0.1100 0 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200 1,400 1,600 1,800 2,000 KWH/MONTH NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC 21

Rate Proposal – Residential Service Rate Impact Analysis - % Change (Phase I) Average Monthly Increase (Decrease) 7000 6000 5000 Median: $4.27/Month # Customers 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 $0.96 $2.22 $3.48 $4.75 $6.01 $7.27 $8.53 $9.79 $11.06 $12.32 $13.58 $14.84 $16.10 $17.36 $18.63 $19.89 $21.15 $22.41 $23.67 $24.94 $26.20 $27.46 $28.72 $29.98 $31.25 $/Month NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC 22

Rate Proposal – Residential Service Rate Impact Analysis - % Change (Phase I) Percentage Change in Annual Bills 12000 10000 Median: 5.2% 8000 # Customers 6000 4000 2000 0 4.57% 4.91% 5.25% 5.59% 5.94% 6.28% 6.62% 6.97% 7.31% 7.65% 7.99% 8.34% 8.68% 9.02% 9.37% 9.71% 10.05% 10.39% 10.74% 11.08% 11.42% 11.77% 12.11% 12.45% 12.80% %/Year NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC 23

Rate Proposal – Small Commercial Service Class Characteristics Small Commercial Class Characteristics (Test Year) Class Meters: 2,353 Class Annual Sales (kWh): 26,763,760 Average Monthly Sales per Customer (kWh): 854 Average Monthly Demand per Customer (kW): 4.60 Average Monthly Load Factor (%): 28% NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC 24

Rate Proposal – Small Commercial Service Phase I Rate Changes / Current Rates / COS Rates Item/Rate - Small Commercial Current Proposed (Phase 1) COS Customer Charge ($/Month) - 1 Phase $7.50 $8.39 $27.58 Customer Charge ($/Month) - 3 Phase $22.50 $23.39 Energy Charge ($/kWh) $0.1004 $0.1006 $0.0466 Green Energy Charge - GEF ($/kWh) $0.00018 $0.00018 $0.00 PPA Charge ($/kWh) ($0.0086) ($0.0038) ($0.0038) Demand Charge ($/kW)* $0.00 $0.00 $17.16 Average Monthly Bill** $98.23 $103.78 Average Rate ($/kWh) $0.1036 $0.1095 $0.1484 Difference (%) 5.65% 43.17% * No Demand Charge for Small Commercial Customers **Excludes Public Utility Tax Based on 2017 Billing Database Analysis NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC 25

Rate Proposal – Small Commercial Service Rate Curve Analysis Accounts Current Proposed Cost of Service $0.4300 450 $0.3800 400 350 $0.3300 300 NO. ACCOUNTS $0.2800 250 $/KWH 200 $0.2300 150 $0.1800 100 $0.1300 50 $0.0800 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1,000 KWH/MONTH NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC 26

Rate Proposal – Small Commercial Service Rate Impact Analysis - % Change (Phase I) Percentage Change in Annual Bills 500 450 Median: 6.0% 400 350 # Customers 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 5.34% 5.61% 5.88% 6.15% 6.42% 6.68% 6.95% 7.22% 7.49% 7.76% 8.03% 8.29% 8.56% 8.83% 9.10% 9.37% 9.64% 9.90% 10.17% 10.44% 10.71% 10.98% 11.25% 11.51% 11.78% %/Year NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC 27

Rate Proposal – Medium Commercial Service Class Characteristics Medium Commercial Class Characteristics (Test Year) Class Meters: 595 Class Annual Sales (kWh): 44,548,720 Average Monthly Sales per Customer (kWh): 6,176 Average Monthly Demand per Customer (kW): 22 Average Monthly Load Factor (%): 39% NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC 28

Rate Proposal – Medium Commercial Service Phase I Rate Changes / Current Rates / COS Rates Item/Rate – Medium Commercial Current Proposed (Phase 1) COS Customer Charge ($/Month) - 1 Phase $7.50 $11.73 $28.77 Customer Charge ($/Month) - 3 Phase $22.50 $26.73 Energy Charge ($/kWh) $0.0677 $0.0658 $0.0487 Green Energy Charge - GEF ($/kWh) $0.00018 $0.00018 $0.00 PPA Charge ($/kWh) ($0.0086) ($0.0038) ($0.0038) Demand Charge ($/kW) $13.95 $13.40 $16.41 Average Monthly Bill* $689.56 $699.39 Average Rate ($/kWh) $0.1106 $0.1122 $0.1067 Difference (%) 1.43% (3.55%) *Excludes Public Utility Tax Based on 2017 Billing Database Analysis NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC 29

Rate Proposal – Medium Commercial Service Rate Curve Analysis Accounts Current Proposed Cost of Service $0.3400 180 160 $0.2900 140 $0.2400 120 NO. ACCOUNTS 100 $/KWH $0.1900 80 $0.1400 60 40 $0.0900 20 $0.0400 0 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% LOAD FACTOR NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC 30

Rate Proposal – Medium Commercial Service Rate Impact Analysis - % Change (Phase I) Percentage Change in Annual Bills 60 Median: 1.4% 50 40 # Customers 30 20 10 0 -2.73% -2.48% -2.24% -1.99% -1.75% -1.51% -1.26% -1.02% -0.77% -0.53% -0.29% -0.04% 0.20% 0.45% 0.69% 0.93% 1.18% 1.42% 1.67% 1.91% 2.15% 2.40% 2.64% 2.89% 3.13% %/Year NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC 31

Rate Proposal – Large Commercial Service Class Characteristics Large Commercial Class Characteristics (Test Year) Class Meters: 448 Class Annual Sales (kWh): 162,084,240 Average Monthly Sales per Customer (kWh): 28,435 Average Monthly Demand per Customer (kW): 85 Average Monthly Load Factor (%): 46% NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC 32

Rate Proposal – Large Commercial Service Phase I Rate Changes / Current Rates / COS Rates Item/Rate - Large Commercial Current Proposed (Phase 1) COS Customer Charge ($/Month) $22.50 $30.11 $34.43 Energy Charge ($/kWh) $0.0677 $0.0647 $0.0466 Green Energy Charge - GEF ($/kWh) $0.00018 $0.00018 $0.00 PPA Charge ($/kWh) ($0.0086) ($0.0038) ($0.0038) Demand Charge ($/kW) $13.90 $13.38 $16.50 Average Monthly Bill* $3,130 $3,142 Average Rate ($/kWh) $0.1037 $0.1041 $0.0918 Difference (%) 0.40% (11.46%) *Excludes Public Utility Tax Based on 2017 Billing Database Analysis NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC 33

Rate Proposal – Large Commercial Service Rate Curve Analysis Accounts Current Proposed Cost of Service $0.2900 100 90 $0.2400 80 70 NO. ACCOUNTS $0.1900 60 $/KWH 50 $0.1400 40 30 $0.0900 20 10 $0.0400 0 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% LOAD FACTOR NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC 34

Rate Proposal – Large Commercial Service Rate Impact Analysis - % Change (Phase I) Percentage Change in Annual Bills 200 180 Median: 0.6% 160 140 # Customers 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 -3.21% -2.26% -1.32% -0.37% 0.57% 1.52% 2.46% 3.41% 4.35% 5.30% 6.24% 7.19% 8.14% 9.08% 10.03% 10.97% 11.92% 12.86% 13.81% 14.75% 15.70% 16.64% 17.59% 18.53% 19.48% %/Year NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC 35

Rate Proposal – Primary Commercial Service Class Characteristics Primary Commercial Class Characteristics (Test Year) Class Meters: 43 Class Annual Sales (kWh): 188,909,620 Average Monthly Sales per Customer (kWh): 385,950 Average Monthly Demand per Customer (kW): 957 Average Monthly Load Factor (%): 56% NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC 36

Rate Proposal – Primary Commercial Service Phase I Rate Changes / Current Rates / COS Rates Item/Rate - Primary Current Proposed (Phase 1) COS Customer Charge ($/Month) $15.00 $19.66 $37.71 Energy Charge ($/kWh) $0.0676 $0.0654 $0.0456 Green Energy Charge - GEF ($/kWh) $0.00018 $0.00018 $0.00 PPA Charge ($/kWh) ($0.0086) ($0.0038) ($0.0038) Demand Charge ($/kW) $11.25 $10.67 $15.68 Average Monthly Bill* $32,448 $32,831 Average Rate ($/kWh) $0.0886 $0.0896 $0.0792 Difference (%) 1.18% (10.60%) *Excludes Public Utility Tax Based on 2017 Billing Database Analysis NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC 37

Rate Proposal – Primary Commercial Service Rate Curve Analysis Accounts Current Proposed Cost of Service $0.2900 8 7 $0.2400 6 NO. ACCOUNTS $0.1900 5 $/KWH 4 $0.1400 3 2 $0.0900 1 $0.0400 0 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% LOAD FACTOR NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC 38

Rate Proposal – Primary Commercial Service Rate Impact Analysis - % Change (Phase I) Percentage Change in Annual Bills 7 6 Median: 0.9% 5 # Customers 4 3 2 1 0 -5.00% -4.71% -4.41% -4.12% -3.82% -3.53% -3.24% -2.94% -2.65% -2.36% -2.06% -1.77% -1.47% -1.18% -0.89% -0.59% -0.30% 0.00% 0.29% 0.58% 0.88% 1.17% 1.47% 1.76% 2.05% %/Year NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC 39

Rate Proposal – Transmission Service Class Characteristics Transmission Class Characteristics (Test Year) Class Meters: 4 Class Annual Sales (kWh): 112,077,720 Average Monthly Sales per Customer (kWh): 2,385,305 Average Monthly Demand per Customer (kW): 4,413 Average Monthly Load Factor (%): 32% Transmission Class: DAFB, Kraft, P&G and White Oak Solar NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC 40

Rate Proposal – Transmission Commercial Service Phase I Rate Changes / Current Rates / COS Rates Item/Rate - Transmission Current Proposed (Phase 1) COS Customer Charge ($/Month) $0.00 $0.00 $46.76 Energy Charge ($/kWh) $0.06370 $0.06180 $0.0450 Green Energy Charge - GEF ($/kWh) $0.00018 $0.00018 $0.00 PPA Charge ($/kWh) ($0.0086) ($0.0038) ($0.0038) Demand Charge ($/kW) $10.50 $9.80 $14.21 Average Monthly Bill* $173,709 $177,369 Average Rate ($/kWh) $0.0743 $0.0759 $0.0695 Difference (%) 2.11% (6.50%) *Excludes Public Utility Tax Based on 2017 Billing Database Analysis NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC 41

Rate Proposal – Transmission Service (Supplemental) • Transmission – Federal – Maintain discount on energy ($0.002/kWh) • 69 kV Transmission for NRG 88 MW EWG System Peak: May: 4:00 PM June: 3:00 PM July: 4:00 PM Aug: 4:00 PM Sept: 5:00 PM Oct: 4:00 PM NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC 42

Rate Proposal – Transmission Service (Supplemental) • 69 kV Transmission for NRG 88 MW EWG – Currently on Transmission Rate • $10.50 / kW • $0.06370 / kWh – Proposed Rate • $7.96 / kW • $0.0618 / kWh – Implement annual on-peak penalty NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC 43

Other Rates • Business Retention Rate – Maintain discount • Private Outdoor Lighting – No change to lighting rates – New LED lights at equivalent lumen rate NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC 44

Discussion

ATTACHMENT #3 Council Committee of the Whole Meeting of 03/27/2018 PROPOSED CHANGES TO: CITY OF DOVER DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE PROCEDURE MANUAL TITLE: Grant Application Procedures PROCEDURE # 317 DATE: November 2, 2007 REVISED: November 7, 2014 Introduction This procedure is intended to establish clear directions for accounting for and administering the funds and resources received by the City through Federal, State, and other Grants. It is the City’s policy to strictly prohibit any political activities related to Federal, State and other political subdivision assisted programs. The City’s employees will not engage in such activities nor spend City funds or grant funds in such activities. Definitions “Closeout”: The process of finalizing a grant project, including completion of the final financial reports, determination of cash balances, accomplishment of necessary accounting entries and placing all project files in a manageable holding system. “Department”: Departments are the major organizational sub-divisions. They have a broad overall purpose. The City of Dover is organized into departments as follow: Customer Services, Parks & Recreation, Library, Public Works, Police, Public Utilities, Mayor, Economic Development, Procurement & Inventory, City Clerk, City Manager, Information Technology, Finance, Human Resources, and Tax Assessor. “Grants”: Funds and resources procured by the City which are restricted as to usage by the government or institution providing the funds. Usually, there is an application process whereby the City provides evidence of its need for the funds, its ability to use the funds in a manner approved by the grantor, and detailing the expenditures expected to be incurred. The primary grant providers to the City are the Federal and State governments. “In Kind Match”: A grant where the required match is not a cash contribution, but is existing personnel time, equipment or material made available for the purpose of the grant. “Matching Funds”: Dollars that must be available in order to qualify for a grant. Often grantors will not support the entire cost of a project and require that the applicant provides a certain share of the project cost from other sources. “NOFA”: Notice of funding availability. Grant-making agencies issue a NOFA to solicit applications. FI 105 1

“OMB Circular A-87”: Establishes principles and standards for determining costs for Federal awards carried out through grants, cost reimbursement contracts, and other agreements with State and local governments. “Pass-Through Entity”: a non-Federal entity that provides a subaward to a subrecipient to carry out part of a Federal program. “Subaward”: an award of financial assistance in the form of money, or property in lieu of money, made under an award by a recipient to an eligible subrecipient or by a subrecipient to a lower tier subrecipient. The term includes financial assistance when provided by any legal agreement, even if the agreement is called a contract. “Subrecipient”: a legal entity to which a subaward is made and which is accountable to the recipient for the use of the funds provided. Departmental Grant Application Decision Making Process 1. The Departments are responsible for seeking out new grant resources. The Department shall analyze the need and future costs of a grant before applying for a grant. A number of questions shall be considered by the department before determining whether a grant application is appropriate. A Department Grant Application Analysis Form to be completed by each department can be found in Appendix A. 2. A copy of the Department Grant Application Analysis Form should be maintained in the grant folders at the department level and copies distributed to the City Manager and Finance Director for budgeting and auditing purposes. 3. If the annual project/program cost in excess of the grant award exceeds $25,000 Council approval is required. A copy of the Department Grant Application Analysis Form should accompany the appropriate approval forms. Grant Application Process 1. The Application process is the most critical step. The requesting department prepares the grant application package and submits the approved, completed grant packages to the proper grantor institution. The reviewing body will make their decision solely upon the evidence of need as shown in the application. Therefore, a well-documented proposal is imperative. Departments should review the requirements of the application closely. 2. City Council must approve the application of all grants which require a ‘monetary’ match in funds of $25,000 or more from the City of Dover or if the grant requires City Council approval. Grants requiring ‘in-kind’ matches do not need Council approval. The Department shall be responsible for acquiring City Council approval before applying for grants with these requirements. Please note if the grant and match have been fully identified in the approved budget, Council approval shall be met. This procedure does not negate any requirements of the City Purchasing Policy. 3. The application cannot be submitted to a grantor for consideration without the written approval of the Department Head regardless of the amount. A copy of the application with the Department Head’s signature should be kept on file within the submitting department. FI 105 2

4. The requesting department will be responsible for ensuring that all approved applications are signed by the Mayor or appropriate official prior to submission. Grant Award/Post Award Process 1. The requesting department receives the grant award letter. Federal award notification is received by email. If the City is awarded the grant, a Committee Action Form (CAF) is to be prepared for the Legislative, Finance & Administrative Committee to approve the grant award. The CAF shall include any non-grant funded expenses listed in the ‘Department Grant Application Analysis Form’ for the current and future fiscal years. The application must include the CFDA# for federal programs and follow the most recently published Office of Justice Financial Guide. Several types of state funded grants are awarded to local law enforcement agencies state- wide based on annual allocations of funds approved by the State Legislature and quarterly applications for funds resulting from property and drug seizures. The Police Department must conform to the grantor requirements for spending these funds, as well as any procedures for pass through Federal Grants as provided above. The Police Chief approves the application for and disbursing of these particular funds. 2. A grant records file shall be maintained and updated by the requesting department for each application throughout the grant process, including the final accounting and closeout. The file shall consist of, at a minimum, the application, acceptance letter and a spreadsheet detailing cash receipts and disbursements. The Department must maintain records of expenditures including any appropriate supporting documentation in accordance with the Federal/State grant guidelines and City’s retention policy. The expenditures must be reviewed to determine if they are an eligible expense under the grant agreement. 3. Confidential records supporting expenditures for informant funds etc, used by the Police Department will be maintained in accordance with current policies and procedures for the department. Procedural notice 42 Criminal Investigations, section VII outlines those procedures to be followed by the Police Department. 4. The Department Head, or his/her designee, shall monitor the status of the grant application and the subsequent award. 5. The original signed grant contract shall be added to the appropriate grant file and identified with a contract number and the performance period. 6. Copies of all documents are to be provided to the Finance Department to monitor complianc e and completion of the annual audit. 7. Where applicable, Public Hearings and Advisory Board Meetings must be held in accordance with the grantor requirements throughout the term of the grant. FI 105 3

Subawards and Monitoring Procedures 1. The requesting department receiving the grant award is the award recipient. If the department is approved or required to make subawards for a Federal grant received, the department is also considered a pass-through entity. For these types of grants, the department must ensure the identifying Federal award information and applicable compliance requirements, including applicable special conditions, are clearly designated in the subrecipient award agreement. The subaward or agreement must, at a minimum, include the following information: A. Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) title and number B. Award name and number C. Name of the Federal awarding agency D. Activities to be performed E. Period of performance F. Project policies G. Original award flow-through requirements that are applicable to the subrecipient H. Instructions and procedures for subaward monitoring compliance I. Other policies and procedures that may apply and need to be followed J. Dollar limitation of the agreement K. Cost principles to be used in determining allowable costs 2. In addition, the department must complete the actions required during the grant program to monitor the subrecipient’s use of Federal funds. The methods of monitoring may vary. Following are some of the factors that may be considered in determining the nature, timing, and extent of monitoring: A. Programs with complex compliance requirements that may have a higher risk of non- compliance. B. The larger the percentage of program awards passed through, the greater the need for subrecipient monitoring. C. Larger dollar awards are of greater risk. D. Subrecipients may be evaluated as higher risk or lower risk to determine the need for closer monitoring. Generally, new subrecipients may require closer monitoring. For existing subrecipients, based on results of during-the-award monitoring and subrecipient audits, a subrecipient may warrant closer monitoring (e.g., the subrecipient has a history of non- compliance as either a recipient or subrecipient, new personnel, or new or substantially changed systems). 3. Some of the mechanisms that may be used to monitor subrecipient activities throughout the year include: A. Review monthly financial and performance reports submitted by the subrecipient. B. Perform subrecipient site visits to examine financial and programmatic records and observe operations. C. Review detailed financial and program data and information submitted by the subrecipient when no site visit is conducted. Documents to review might include timesheets, invoices, contracts, and ledgers that tie back to financial reports. D. Regular communication with subrecipients and appropriate inquiries concerning program activities. FI 105 4

4. The purpose of all monitoring activities is to provide reasonable assurance that the subrecipient has administered the pass-through funding in compliance with the laws, regulations, and the provisions of the award and that the required performance goals are being achieved. Accounting Procedures 1. The Department Head shall request account numbers for grant revenues and expected expenditures from the City Finance office. Where applicable a project number will be assigned to each grant to track receipts and expenses. 2. The Finance Department and Department Head are responsible for maintaining separate records for each grant project to avoid commingling of grant funds. 3. The Department Head is responsible for assuring all grant project funds are expended according to the terms of the grant. All grant project funds must be obligated by the termination date(s) specified in the grant. Any matching funds must be expended and reported timely. 4. The Department Head is responsible for submitting any required reimbursement requests to the grantor as authorized expenditures are incurred. At the end of each fiscal year, the Department Head shall submit to the Finance Department a list of all outstanding reimbursement requests and qualified expenditures incurred, but not submitted to the grantor for reimbursement. Accordingly, the Finance Department shall create a grant receivable entry, reconciling this to the grant activity recorded during the period. 5. Purchase, Invoice and Payment processing shall be in accordance with the City of Dover Purchasing Policy, incorporated into this procedure by this reference. Payroll processing shall be in accordance with City payroll procedures. 6. Retention of records shall be in accordance with the State of Delaware’s Local Government General Records Retention Schedule for Grants, which specifies grant financial files are to be retained for five three years after submission of the grant closeout letter and successful audit. 7. Requests for drawdown of funds must be in accordance with award requirements specified by the grantor. 8. Receipts are received and entered into the General Ledger by the Finance Department. 9. The Department Head is responsible for maintaining records of all inventory purchased and are to provide an updated copy to the Finance Department June 30 each year for audit purposes. All records for equipment, non-expendable personal property and real property shall be retained for a period of at least three years from the date of the disposition, replacement, or transfer. 10. Records must be maintained for each non-expendable item that costs $5,000 or more and has a useful life of one year or more. The Department Head shall send the invoices and appropriate backup data to the Finance Department for recording in the Capital Asset System. 11. The Department Head is responsible for timely submission of reports to the grantor as required under the terms of the grant. FI 105 5

12. The Department Head is responsible for submitting quarterly and final Financial Status Reports (FSR’s) for grants if required under the terms of the grant. A copy of any FSR must be submitted to the Finance Department before being sent to the grantor. Finance shall reconcile amounts reported on the FSR with the amounts recorded in the City's accounting system. Any discrepancy shall be resolved by the Department Head and communicated to the Finance Department. 13. The Department Head is responsible for performing and monitoring closeout activities. 14. Any unexpended funds shall be returned to the grantor and any interest earned on cash balances shall be disbursed in accordance with the grant requirements. 15. The Finance Department is responsible for preparing Form SF-SAC, “Data Collection Form for Reporting on Audits of States, Local Governments, and Non-Profit Organizations,” in accordance with Federal OMB Circular A-133. 16. A quarterly report will be presented to City Council by the Finance Department for all grants. Control of Grant Funds 1. Interest earned and expended is promptly recorded in the accounting records and reported on the FSR’s. FSR’s are due 45 days after the end of the calendar quarter. 2. Grant funds and interest earned is expended by the end of the allowable period. 3. Matching funds are expended and reported timely. 4. Final FSR’s are submitted timely. 5. The Department Head will ensure grant requirements are met and if necessary will request changes from the grantor 60 days before the end of the award period. 6. Draw down of Federal funds will be initiated after the Department submits the quarterly FSR’s. This ensures that the department has already paid for the cost of goods or services incurred on behalf of Federal grants. Any funds received in advance will be placed in an interest earning account. 7. Department Heads ensure matching funds are spent and that related expenditures are tracked for reporting purposes. 8. Department Heads will obtain permission from federal grantees to spend the interest earned a s part of the grant proceeds. They will request a Budget Adjustment Request to augment grant budgets with interest earned revenues that they have received. DISTRIBUTION Mayor CDBG Director Police Department City Manager Department Heads FI 105 6

Dover Police Department General Order 17 BUDGET AND PURCHASING PROCEDURES I. PURPOSE The purpose of this order is to outline the responsibilities associated with budgeting and purchasing, and the procedures to be followed in carrying out those responsibilities II. POLICY The Dover Police Department will manage all budget, grant and purchasing procedures in accordance with the procedures established by the City of Dover. If a conflict between the city procedures and established grant guidelines occurs, the grant guidelines will be followed. III. BUDGET PROCESS The Police Resources Manager is responsible for all actions associated with budget preparation and management. These duties include the following: A. Request inputs for the annual budget from the Chief of Police, Deputy Chief and Division/Unit Commanders for use in budget planning and preparation. B. Prepare a draft budget and follow-up documents using procedures established by the City of Dover. C. Review all expenditures throughout the fiscal year and make recommendations to the Chief of Police for any required budget revisions. IV. GRANT PROCESS The Police Resources Manager is also responsible for all actions associated with the preparation of grant applications, management, and reporting to include the following duties: A. Request inputs for grant applications from the staff for use in their preparation. B. Perform all grant management and oversee all purchasing actions. C. Prepare financial grant status reports as required. For granting agencies that require the submission of both financial and program status reports, the Police Resources Manager will be responsible for the financial reports and the Administrative Division Commander will complete the program reports. The separation of these duties is mandated by Federal grant guidelines for internal control purposes. D. Perform subgrant monitoring as required. There are police grants that may be awarded on a joint basis due to a disparate funding situation identified by the granting agency. The prime example of this includes recurring law enforcement grants the police department receives from the Federal Department of Justice. For these grants, the Dover Police Department shares its award with other agencies as identified in the grant funding authorization document which is published on the USDOJ website at the time of the grant solicitation. Since the Dover Police Department usually is awarded the larger share of funds on these grants, it MAR 2018 GO 17 - 1

Dover Police Department becomes the pass-through entity and makes subawards to the other agencies on the joint awarded grant. The following procedures will apply: 1. Grant subawards will be issued and contain any applicable information as identified in the City’s Grant Application Procedures (Procedure 317). However, all grant purchases will be made and paid for directly through the City of Dover’s financial systems, so the Dover Police Department will ensure all grant purchases comply with the City of Dover Purchasing Policy. 2. Subrecipient monitoring: the grants received in the past were awarded jointly to the Dover Police Department, Smyrna Police Department and Kent County for purchases of law enforcement equipment and/or training. The funding for the subrecipient shares did not exceed $25,000, so there is less risk involved with completing these types of purchases. As a result, monitoring procedures will include: the review of the program and financial documentation submitted for the grant purchases to ensure they comply with the City of Dover Purchasing Policy and verification that the purchases were made and the required equipment lists are provided to close the grant. 3. The monitoring instructions above will be outlined in the Memorandum of Understanding that is required to be submitted as part of the grant application and in the grant subaward document. V. PURCHASING PROCEDURES The Central Services Coordinator is primarily responsible for all department purchases. Additional personnel may be authorized to make purchases by the Chief of Police. The following procedures will be followed: A. All purchases will comply with the City of Dover Purchasing Policy. B. Commanding officers will be held accountable for those portions of the agency’s budget that relate to their functions. Requests for purchases will be based on the approved budget and made through the chain of command to the Police Resources Manager and Central Services Coordinator: 1. Daily Operating Supplies include office, computer and custodial supplies, uniform items, and other similar items that do not require any special bid actions. a. Ordering - Requests for these items will be provided to the Central Services Coordinator via personal memorandum from the staff or using the Dover Police Department Requisition form. Verbal or voicemail requests will not be honored because there is no audit trail 1) A copy of the form is included in Attachment A and is maintained in the forms directory on the I drive on the department server. 2) This form was created using a workflow application which will automatically route the form electronically through the chain of command via email for the appropriate approvals. As a result, please do not photocopy the form and fill it out manually. a. Pick-up - Once the items have been received, the Central Services Coordinator will notify the individual that the item is in and will coordinate a time for pick-up. MAR 2018 GO 17 - 2

Dover Police Department b. Occasionally, the requestor may need to pick-up ordered items directly from the local vendor. To maintain accountability of the items, approval must be obtained from the Central Services Coordinator prior to pick-up. In addition, the person making the pickup will ensure the receipt for the items is provided to the Central Services Coordinator as a written receipt/verification for all items is required by Finance to make the payment. 2. Special order items include non-stocked items such as specialized equipment; grant funded equipment, etc. a. Ordering – Requests for these items will be provided to the Central Services Coordinator via personal memorandum for items costing $5,000 and less or Dover PD Bid Summary form for items valued over $5,000. b. Bid Information and process – Requestors must perform research to provide bidding information. The minimum information needed to process the request includes: item description, quantity and recommended sources. Three sources are needed and identify vendor names and phone numbers. The Central Services Coordinator will contact the vendors to obtain their particular item specifications. Once the information is received, the Central Services Coordinator will coordinate with the City’s Purchasing Agent for formal bids, when required to order the item. c. Pick-up - Once the order is filled and items have been received, the Central Services Coordinator will notify the individual that the item is in and will coordinate a time for pickup. 3. Exceptions – the only exceptions recognized to the above guidelines apply to the ordering of computer equipment, computer software, building maintenance supplies, weapons and ammunition. The Department LAN Technician, Special Operations Response Team (SORT) Commander, and Building Craftsperson in coordination with the Central Services Coordinator or Police Resources Manager will order these types of items respectively, and in accordance with the City of Dover purchasing policy. C. All invoices and receipts for items received will be reviewed by the Central Services Coordinator and forwarded to the Police Resources Manager for further processing. D. The Police Resources Manager will prepare the necessary documentation required for payment through the City of Dover financial systems. Approval of purchases will be accomplished by the Police Resources Manager or other designee as authorized by the Chief of Police. VI. ACCOUNTING PROCEDURES A. The Police Resources Manager will maintain records of all invoices and payments throughout each fiscal year. A record of all transactions will be maintained for each line item account, including all grant accounts with the exception of salary and fringe benefit accounts. B. Accounts established for Petty Cash transactions will be managed in accordance with the City of Dover’s Petty Cash Procedures. C. All Funds and accounts are subject to the independent audit conducted annually as contracted by the City of Dover. MAR 2018 GO 17 - 3

Dover Police Department D. Accounting of all agency-owned property shall be the responsibility of the Central Services Coordinator in accordance with procedures under separate cover. The Central Services Coordinator shall also be responsible for the maintenance and operational readiness of all stored property. VII. DEFINITIONS “Pass-Through Entity”: a non-Federal entity that provides a subaward to a subrecipient to carry out part of a Federal program. “Subaward”: an award of financial assistance in the form of money, or property in lieu of money, made under an award by a recipient to an eligible subrecipient or by a subrecipient to a lower tier subrecipient. The term includes financial assistance when provided by any legal agreement, even if the agreement is called a contract. “Subrecipient”: a legal entity to which a subaward is made and which is accountable to the recipient for the use of the funds provided. VIII. SUPERSEDES This Procedural Notice supersedes all previous procedures and directives issued orally or in writing that are not in total conformity herewith. IX. EFFECTIVE DATE This Procedural Notice shall become effective upon execution and issuance ORDER EFFECTIVE AND ISSUED THIS ___ day of Mar 2018 Marvin C. Mailey Chief of Police MAR 2018 GO 17 - 4

Dover Police Department NOTE: The Requisition Form below is maintained on the I drive forms directory. Please fill out the form from there as it was created using an application that automatically routes the user’s request electronically for approvals via email. BID SUMMARY FORM -- SAMPLE – Police Resources Manager Approval Date Central Services Coordinator Approval Date PFC Smith 4/5/16 Requester Date Item Description: Undercover Joey Wire (4 each) Funding Source: Accounting Classification: EIDE Grant 710-1700-545.20-26 Method of Purchase (Circle One): Sole Continuity of Declared Other – Explain Bid Vendor Service Emergency ___________________ COMPARISON OF BIDS Vendor Contact Person Phone # Pricing Info Vendor A Jim Rogers 555-1234 $7500 /set plus shipping Vendor B Herman Mueller 555-2225 Does not carry model requested Vendor C Heidi Lewis 555-8908 $5500/set plus shipping Recommended Vendor: Vendor A Reason for Award: Lowest Bid MAY 2017 17 – Attachment B

Monthly Report February 2018 Office of City Assessor

ASSESSOR’S REPORT Number of Deeds Stamped for Transfer Tax Dollar Amount for the Month of Feb. 2017/2018 the Month of Feb. 2017/2018 36 $100 40 29 Thousands 23 28 $50 $61 30 13 16 $50 $17 20 $21 6 9 2017 $4 $5 10 0 0 $0 $0 2017 0 $0 2018 2018 First Time Buyer for the Month Feb. 2017/2018 Realty Property of Feb. 2017/2018 Sales in Dollars Received Prior 29 to Recording 30 23 Res. Non‐First $6 $3 $4 $2 $3 Millions 20 16 $4 13 Time Buyers $2 $0 $0 $0 $0 2017 10 Res. First Time $0 Buyers 2018 0 2017 2018 Major Updates Dec ‐ 17 Jan ‐ 18 Feb ‐ 18 Assessment Change $16,433,300 $10,792,100 $1,038,700 Residential Sales Ratio Report Sales in Study Total Assessed Total Sale Price Ratio PRD Value 27 $4,595,540 $3,908,500 0.85 1.00 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 ‐ Delinquent Tax Bills with door hangers for properties with outstanding property taxes 2

MAR 20, 2018 CITY OF DOVER PAGE: 1 10:50 AM SALES RATIO REPORT CA324 PARID NBHD LUC ADDRESS UNITS STYLE YRBLT STORIES SFLA GRADE CDU TOTAL APPR SALE DT PRICE ASR ED05-067.11-01-05.00 10 R10 918 WOODCREST DR 1 5 1972 2 2919 C FR 177,600 12-FEB-18 229,900 ED05-067.16-01-51.00 10 R10 611 CAROL ST 1 5 1983 2 1612 C+ AV 145,800 28-FEB-18 194,900 ED05-067.18-03-76.00 17 R10 56 FREEDOM DR 1 14 1976 1 1482 C AV 148,900 14-FEB-18 177,000 ED05-067.20-02-69.00 8 R10 564 N STATE ST 1 14 1954 1 1990 B- VG 223,200 09-FEB-18 270,000 ED05-067.20-03-77.00 8 R10 350 N BRADFORD ST 1 1 1900 2 1334 C AV 109,200 01-FEB-18 123,000 ED05-067.20-04-01.00 8 R20 19 CLARA ST 2 1 1930 2 2050 B AV 156,500 05-FEB-18 130,000 ED05-068.13-01-83.00 10 R10 511 OAK LN 1 14 1959 1 1136 C AV 127,000 28-FEB-18 149,900 ED05-068.19-02-57.00 6 R10 46 ACACIA PL 1 8 1998 2 1640 C AV 138,700 20-FEB-18 160,000 ED05-076.03-02-12.00 14 R10 307 PARADEE DR 1 13 2007 2 1867 C+ AV 137,800 05-FEB-18 174,000 ED05-076.03-02-96.00 14 R10 380 TRIBBITT ST 13 2017 2 1760 C+ AV 150,400 02-FEB-18 162,900 ED05-076.03-04-46.00 11 R10 316 GILLIBROOK LN 1 14 2007 1 1924 B+ AV 239,500 05-FEB-18 225,000 ED05-076.05-03-51.00 14 R10 115 STONEY DR 1 8 1988 2 1763 C+ AV 138,000 21-FEB-18 147,500 ED05-076.10-02-40.00 16 R10 1511 FAWN ST 1 14 1989 1 1372 C+ AV 143,300 08-FEB-18 179,000 ED05-076.10-03-18.00 16 R10 1434 S FARMVIEW DR 1 8 1990 2 1443 C+ AV 127,000 27-FEB-18 148,000 ED05-077.07-06-04.00 6 R10 232 LADY BUG DR 13 2018 2 1220 B- AV 137,300 20-FEB-18 180,900 ED05-077.07-06-05.00 6 R10 236 LADY BUG DR 13 2018 2 1220 B- AV 137,500 12-FEB-18 173,290 ED05-077.07-06-37.00 6 R10 713 MARTA DR 1 2016 2 1920 B- AV 187,300 15-FEB-18 227,000 ED05-077.07-07-04.00 6 R10 112 LADY BUG DR 13 2018 2 1220 B- AV 137,600 20-FEB-18 178,875 ED05-077.07-07-62.00 6 R10 238 NOB HILL RD 13 2018 2 1220 B- AV 128,500 12-FEB-18 146,990 ED05-077.07-07-63.00 6 R10 236 NOB HILL RD 13 2018 2 1220 B- AV 128,500 01-FEB-18 152,965 ED05-077.07-07-64.00 6 R10 234 NOB HILL RD 13 2018 2 1220 B- AV 128,500 20-FEB-18 156,555 ED05-077.07-07-66.00 6 R10 230 NOB HILL RD 13 2018 2 1220 B- AV 131,000 16-FEB-18 160,965 ED05-077.09-05-65.00 4 R10 18 ELM TER 1 1 1925 2 1808 C+ GD 158,800 08-FEB-18 188,000 ED05-077.11-02-31.00 6 R10 599 CRAWFORD AVE 1 14 1967 1 1130 C AV 127,900 02-FEB-18 147,000 ED05-085.08-02-24.00 12 R10 10 BAKER TRN 1 16 1964 1 1699 C+ GD 165,200 16-FEB-18 190,000 LC05-058.17-04-59.00 1 R10 4 GORDON DR 1 11 1988 1 1178 D+ AV 68,000 15-FEB-18 101,900 LC05-068.10-01-19.00 13 R10 509 SCHOONER WAY 1 13 1993 2 2032 C+ AV 109,500 09-FEB-18 120,000

CITY COUNCIL - FY 17/18 Page 1 of 3 CITY COUNCIL COMMUNITY ENHANCEMENT FUND JULY 1, 2017 - APRIL 2, 2018 110-1200-512.30-37 Current Balance - $18,384.48 COMMUNITY ENHANCEMENT FUND - $2,500 FOR EACH COUNCIL MEMBER PER DISTRICT AND $5,000 FOR THE AT-LARGE COUNCIL MEMBER. THE PURPOSE OF THE BUDGETED AMOUNT $25,000.00 FUND IS TO ALLOW MEMBERS TO CONTRIBUTE FUNDS TO A SMALL PROJECT OR COMMUNITY NEEDS IN EACH DISTRICT. TOTAL $25,000.00 COUNCIL P.O. #/ TOTAL YEAR TO DATE SPONSOR VENDOR DESCRIPTION INVOICE # CHARGES DATE BALANCE 07/12/17 Anderson Inner City Cultural Councilm an Anderson authorized the use of Em ail dated $600.00 $600.00 $24,400.00 League, Inc. $600.00 of his com m unity enhancem ent funds 07/11/17 from to fund 50% of the mem bership dues for 5 David needy students to participate in the Sankofa Anderson to African Drum and Dance Troupe. City Clerk's Office 07/16/17 Anderson MLK Jr. Educational Councilm an Anderson authorized the use of Em ail dated $500.00 $1,100.00 $23,900.00 Com m unity Center, $500.00 of his com m unity enhancem ent funds 07/16/17 from Inc. to help pay for breakfast and lunch for the David Saturday Academ y participants. Anderson to City Clerk's Office 07/26/17 Slavin Central Delaware Councilm an Slavin authorized the use of Em ail dated $670.56 $1,770.56 $23,229.44 Habitat for Hum anity $670.56 to purchase incidental equipment and 07/26/17 from play apparatus for the Habitat for Humanity's Tim Slavin to pop up parks/play streets program. It was Traci noted that the gam es would be usable for McDowell 07/31/17 Hare Air Force Ball future events Councilm too. authorized the use of an Hare Dover Downs $500.00 $2,270.56 $22,729.44 Com m ittee $500.00 for the deposit to reserve the Dover Banquet Event Downs ballroom for 436 Squadron's Annual Air Order (BEO) Force Ball. #24,727 dated 06/27/17 08/02/17 Cole Dover Library Councilm an Cole authorized the use of his Sam 's Club $397.50 $2,668.06 $22,331.94 Foundation comm unity enhancem ent funds to reim burse receipt dated the Dover Library Foundation for the purchase 08/15/17; of bottled water for the Dover Com ic Con 2017 Em ail dated event. 08/02/17 from Scott Cole to Traci McDowell 08/07/17 Neil 3d Airlift Squadron Councilm an Neil authorized $100.00 of his Em ail dated $100.00 $2,768.06 $22,231.94 Booster Club comm unity enhancem ent funds to be donated 08/07/17 from to the 3d Airlift Squadron Booster Club for the Fred Neil to Dover Air Force Base Open House. Traci McDowell 08/14/17 Anderson Boys and Girls Club of Councilm an Anderson authorized a donation of Em ails dated $100.00 $2,868.06 $22,131.94 Delaware $100.00 of his com m unity enhancem ent funds 08/08/17 and to the Boys and Girls Club of Delaware, for the 08/14/17 from Greater Dover Boys and Girls Club - 4th District David children. Anderson to Debbie Krueger 08/14/17 Anderson City of Dover Parkland Councilm an Anderson authorized a donation of Em ail dated $250.00 $3,118.06 $21,881.94 Reserve $250.00 of his com m unity enhancem ent funds 08/14/17 from for the Back to School Giveaway and Rib-Off David Fundraiser Initiative (to be credited to the City's Anderson to Parkland Reserve) Debbie Krueger 04/02/18 S:\BUDG ETS\Coun-18.qpw

CITY COUNCIL - FY 17/18 Page 2 of 3 08/23/17 Cole Dover High School Councilm an Cole authorized $300.00 of his Em ail dated $300.00 $3,418.06 $21,581.94 AFJROTC Booster comm unity enhancem ent funds to help pay for 08/23/17 from Club storage units for the air rifles used by the Rifle Scott Cole to Team . Traci McDowell 09/08/17 Polce City of Dover Clearing Councilm an Polce authorized the Em ail dated $250.00 $3,668.06 $21,331.94 Account - Rec allocation of $250.00 of his community 09/08/17 from Revenue enhancement funds for the Dover Park Tanner Polce Revitalization Event on 09/09/17. to Donna Mitchell 09/08/17 Lewis City of Dover Clearing Councilm an Lewis authorized the allocation of Em ail dated $250.00 $3,918.06 $21,081.94 Account - Rec $250.00 of his com m unity enhancem ent funds 09/08/17 from Revenue for the Dover Park Revitalization Event on Tanner Polce 09/09/17 to Donna Mitchell 09/11/17 Slavin City of Dover Clearing Councilm an Slavin authorized the allocation Em ail dated $250.00 $4,168.06 $20,831.94 Account - Rec of $250.00 of his com m unity enhancem ent 09/07/17 from Revenue funds for the Dover Park Revitalization Event Tim Slavin to on 09/09/17 Roy Sudler and Donna 09/07/17 Sudler City of Dover Clearing Councilm an Sudler authorized the allocation Mitchell Em ail dated $300.00 $4,468.06 $20,531.94 Account - Rec of $300.00 of his com m unity enhancem ent 09/07/17 from Revenue funds for the Dover Park Revitalization Event Roy Sudler on 09/09/17 09/19/17 Anderson Interdenominational Councilm an Anderson authorized the Em ail dated $520.00 $4,988.06 $20,011.94 Ministerial Alliance of designation of $520.00 to the 09/19/17 from Dover and Vicinity Interdenom inational Ministerial Alliance of David (IMA) Dover and Vicinity (IMA) for the Expungem ent Anderson to Clinic on 11/03/17. The funds are for Dover City Clerk's residents. The cost is estim ated to be $52 per Office 11/13/17 Anderson Interdenominational person. Councilm an Anderson authorized the Em ail dated $380.00 $5,368.06 $19,631.94 Ministerial Alliance of designation of $380.00 for the Community, 11/11/2017 Dover and Vicinity Fam ily, and Fellowship Dinner from David (IMA) Anderson to City Clerk's Office 11/13/17 Slavin National Council on Councilm an Slavin authorized the designation Em ail dated $697.46 $6,065.52 $18,934.48 Agricultural Life and of $697.46 for playstreets equipm ent. It was 07/26/17 from Labor Research Fund, noted that the gam es would be usable for Tim Slavin to Inc. (NCALL) future events too. (Note: $670.56 was Traci previously paid to Central Delaware Habitat for McDowell and Hum anity for the purchase of these item s invoice based upon the em ail correspondence #20171031 received; however, the item s were actually purchased and invoiced by NCALL. Habitat is supposed to return the $670.56 that they 12/08/17 Neil W hite Oak/Town Point received Councilmin error.)authorized the designation of an Neil Em ail dated $50.00 $6,115.52 $18,884.48 Civic Association $50.00 to the W hite Oak/Town Point Civic 12/08/17 from Association to help with Christm as donations Fred Neil to for Dover fam ilies in need of assistance Traci McDowell 01/23/18 Lewis Dover Fire Councilm an Lewis authorized the designation Letter from $500.00 $6,615.52 $18,384.48 Departm ent/Robbins of $500.00 of his com m unity enhancem ent Dover Fire to Hose Co. funds to Dover Fire Department for the Lewis dated purchase of new equipm ent for the fire 1/18/18. apparatus currently on order. Personally delivered to Clerk by Lewis on 1/22/18. $6,615.52 $18,384.48 04/02/18 S:\BUDG ETS\Coun-18.qpw

CITY COUNCIL - FY 17/18 Page 3 of 3 Budgeted District Council Sponsor YTD Expenditures Balance Amount $5,000.00 At-Large Slavin $1,618.02 $3,381.98 $2,500.00 1st District Lindell $0.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 1st District Polce $250.00 $2,250.00 $2,500.00 2nd District Hare $500.00 $2,000.00 $2,500.00 2nd District Lewis $750.00 $1,750.00 $2,500.00 3rd District Cole $697.50 $1,802.50 $2,500.00 3rd District Neil $150.00 $2,350.00 $2,500.00 4th District Anderson $2,350.00 $150.00 $2,500.00 4th District Sudler $300.00 $2,200.00 TOTAL $6,615.52 $18,384.48 04/02/18 S:\BUDG ETS\Coun-18.qpw

CITY MANAGER’S MONTHLY REPORT FEBRUARY 2018

Average Disconnects 112 92 87 71 69 61 58 58 60 53 49 48 50 47 51 45 38 36 33 32 36 39 25 21 24 23 FEB-17 MAR-17 APR-17 MAY-17 JUN-17 JUL-17 AUG-17 SEP-17 OCT-17 NOV-17 DEC-17 JAN-18 FEB-18 Average Accounts Cut Per Day Average Accounts Available to Cut Per Day

Payment Agreements / Extensions 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 Feb- Mar- Apr- May- Jun- Aug- Sep- Oct- Nov- Dec- Jan- Feb- Jul-17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 18 18 Series1 385 467 525 523 436 501 695 525 554 455 448 740 740 Work Orders Processed 2,500 2,000 1,500 1,000 500 0 FEB-17 MAR-17 APR-17 MAY-17 JUN-17 JUL-17 AUG-17 SEP-17 OCT-17 NOV-17 DEC-17 JAN-18 FEB-18 Feb- Mar- Apr- May- Jun- Aug- Sep- Oct- Nov- Dec- Jan- Feb- Jul-17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 18 18 Series1 1,478 1,665 1,325 1,515 1,996 1,955 2,132 1,811 1,820 1,664 1,439 1,567 1,567 CUSTOMER PAYMENT USAGE 80,000 60,000 40,000 20,000 0 Drive-Thru Over the Mail, Drop Credit Cards Bank Drafts Window Counter Box 2018 YTD 15,815 34,803 129,941 1,632 14,621 2017 YTD 18,900 35,689 124,987 1,418 14,722

ELECTRIC DEPARTMENT Electric Divisions System Peak Total System Load Number of New Month outages customers June 16 65,414 Services June 16 133.59 July 16 80,114 June 16 14 601 June 16 53 July 16 165.92 Aug 16 83,086 July 16 9 307 July 16 13 Aug 16 162.61 Aug 16 9 214 Aug 16 13 Sept 16 159.99 Sept 16 67,117 Sept 16 7 915 Sept 16 35 Oct 16 116.94 Oct 16 57,707 Oct 16 8 224 Oct 16 27 Nov 16 98.27 Nov 16 54,812 Nov 16 6 4293 Nov 16 41 Dec 16 101.04 Dec 16 60,179 Dec 16 5 207 Dec 16 37 Jan 17 113.04 Jan 17 63,172 Jan 17 3 12 Jan 17 40 Feb 17 54,811 Feb 17 1 2 Feb 17 31 Feb 17 106.4 Mar 17 4 160 Mar 17 15 Mar 17 108.2 Mar 17 60,690 Apr 17 4 114 Apr 17 58 Apr 17 107.03 Apr 17 54,062 May 17 5 148 May 17 58 May 17 133.93 May 17 57,823 June 17 7 3084 June 17 25 June 17 70,081 July 17 19 2556 July 17 90 June 17 155.81 Aug 17 8 1466 Aug 17 24 July 17 162.88 July 17 79,883 Sept 17 2 1094 Sept 17 31 Aug 17 157.18 Aug 17 74,534 Oct 17 5 2311 Oct 17 83 Sept 17 137.01 Sept 17 64,235 Nov 17 7 176 Nov 17 41 Oct 17 59,890 Dec 17 2 261 Dec 17 25 Oct 17 129.11 Jan 18 4 263 Jan 18 17 Nov 17 98.13 Nov 17 56,552 Feb 18 1 32 Feb 18 89 Dec 17 108.57 Dec 17 62,992 Jan 18 116.70 Jan 18 67,204 Feb 18 106.55 Feb 18 55,759 Electric Monthly Outage Report The annual outage goal will be less than 295 minutes per customer, which is a Delaware Standard. This will be measured by calculating the System Average Interruption Duration Index. FY 18 YTD FY 17 FY 16 152 27.58 26.47 Controllable Outages Average Response Time Annual goal is less than 40 Goal is less than 30 minutes Month Year-to-date Month Year-to-date 1 20 23 Minutes 32.87 Minutes PROGRAM UPDATES FEB 18 FEB 17 FY18 YTD Tree Trimming 382 393 2871 Number of Oil Releases 1 0 3 Lost Time Accidents – All Electric Utility Divisions 0 0 1 New Services 89 31 400

HUMAN RESOURCES February 2018 Feb March April May June* July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Total Category 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 18 18 Caucasian* 296 293 290 289 291 292 290 291 288 285 285 288 290 n/a Minorities* 71 72 73 73 74 79 76 77 74 75 75 76 77 n/a Hired 1 5 1 3 3 9 1 8 1 1 3 5 3 44 Terminated/Resigned/ 4 7 3 4 3 3 6 6 6 3 3 1 0 49 Retired/Other Transferred/Promoted 0 1 1 1 0 3 1 1 3 1 4 6 0 22 Jobs Posted 6 7 5 2 1 7 1 2 4 3 2 6 3 49 Workers Comp. Injuries 2 2 2 4 3 1 0 6 3 2 3 3 3 34 Workers Comp. Hours 252 397 275 648 475 417 396 173 202 227 352 106 75 3995 *338 Full-time Employees: Part-time Employees: 29 (3 Pitts Center, 1 Recreation, 16 Library, 1 Customer Service, 8 Police Department) -Numbers do not reflect, temporary, seasonal, relief fire dispatchers, committee or council members. * Updated Position Hired: Library Page, (part-time); Motor Equipment Operator, (Grounds); Office Assistant II, (Planning & Inspections) Positions Posted: Library Clerk, (part-time); Motor Equipment Operator, (Streets), Cadets, (Police) Recruitment Information (Positions closed in February) Position Total Female Male Unknown Black White Hispanic Asian/Pacific American Two Or Unknown In Out Islander Indian/Alaskan More Dover Dover Native Billing Supervisor 19 15 4 - 1 13 - - 1 1 3 7 12 Administrative 57 49 3 5 17 35 - - - 2 3 20 37 Assistant (City Clerk) Civil Engineer 4 1 3 - - 2 - 1 - - 1 - 4 Library Clerk (part- 31 26 5 - 4 20 - 1 - 2 4 18 13 time) Motor Equipment 7 - 7 - 2 5 - - - - - 3 4 Operator (Streets) Open or Currently Recruiting* Open or Currently Feb March April May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Recruiting by Dept. 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 18 18 Electric 4 4 4 4 5 7 7 8 8 9 7 7 7 Public Works 5 6 6 6 7 8 11 13 13 12 14 11 9 Police 6 7.5 9.5 9 8 6.5 6.5 .5 3.5 3.5 3.5 4.5 4.5 All Other Departments 11.5 12 10 9.5 9 7.5 7.5 8 10.5 11.5 9.5 8 6.5 Totals 26.5 29.5 29.5 28.5 29 29 32 29.5 35 36 34 30.5 27 *Not used for Budgeting Purposes  The following has been updated to reflect the Fiscal 2017-18 Budget Electric: Lineman 1st Class, Lineman 2nd class, Electric Director, (2) Substation Technician, Groundworker, Electric Meter Technician Crew Leader Public Works: Motor Equipment Operator II (water/wastewater); Civil Engineer, (3) Motor Equipment Operator I (Sanitation), (1) Motor Equipment Operator II (Grounds); Crew leader (Streets); Crew Leader (Sanitation); Mechanic II Police: Cadet; (4) Police Officers All Other Departments: Assistant Controller/Treasurer; Billing Supervisor (Customer Service); (1) Customer Service Clerk I (part-time); Budget Analyst; Administrative Assistant (City Clerk’s Office); Library Assistant, Librarian I (part-time), Library Clerk I (part-time)

HUMAN RESOURCES (Continued) Turnover Statistics 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Total Turnover % 5.57 6.75 11.00 10.91 6.02 12.05 8.68 15.36 .27 Termination Turnover % 0.27 1.08 0.29 1.47 .57 .28 .54 1.92 - Resignation Turnover % 2.12 4.05 5.21 5.01 2.29 7.56 6.24 7.41 .27 Retirement Turnover % 3.18 1.62 5.50 4.42 3.15 4.20 1.90 4.39 - Other - - - - - - - 1.65 - 2012 Healthcare cost sharing implemented; 2013 Healthcare cost sharing implemented for DOE 2016 RIF in Economic Development Average Employees 2010 2011 2012* 2013* 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Total Number of Employees 21 25 38 37 21 42 32 56 1 Separating from Service Average Number of Full-time 362 356 333 325 331 333 340 337 337 Employees Average Number of Part-time 16 15 12 14 18 24 28 28 29 Employees * Healthcare cost sharing implemented Workers Compensation Cost CY 2018 $1 $9 Department $2 $1 $16 $2 $3 Total Cost (In thousands) Total $34,000

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGIES Service Requests Resolved 50 44 41 38 40 36 31 31 29 30 27 27 26 22 23 22 20 10 0 Feb-17 Mar-17 Apr-17 May-17 Jun-17 Jul-17 Aug-17 Sep-17 Oct-17 Nov-17 Dec-17 Jan-18 Feb-18 Programming Requests Completed 40 34 29 28 29 30 24 22 23 21 18 20 19 20 20 17 10 0 Feb-17 Mar-17 Apr-17 May-17 Jun-17 Jul-17 Aug-17 Sep-17 Oct-17 Nov-17 Dec-17 Jan-18 Feb-18 Page Views - City of Dover Web Page 30,000 25,000 20,000 Pages Viewed 25,578 27,338 25,417 25,344 15,000 23,724 22,895 24,034 23,269 22,554 20,417 19,913 19,305 17,293 10,000 5,000 0 Feb-17 Mar-17 Apr-17 May-17 Jun-17 Jul-17 Aug-17 Sep-17 Oct-17 Nov-17 Dec-17 Jan-18 Feb-18 Noteworty: Mike completed a course in querying SQL data. Renewed Microsoft Enterprise Agreement Joe completed his A+ Certification Chart of Accounts loaded into Munis

February 2018 Monthly Report Highlighted Special Events & Attendance: Tuesday Talks - African American Archaeology 26 History Book Club - Washington & Lincoln 16 Celebrarte The Arts - Sankofa African Dance Co. 51 Total Items Checed Out: 28,797 Programs: Offered Attended E-books: 2,595 Adult 59 846 New Library Cards: 318 Teens 28 143 Children 56 1,178 Library Card Holders: 36,357 Job Center 28 229 Service Area Population: 62,527 Library Visitors: 20,614 Meeting Rooms Usage: 793 Computer Users: 3,884 Wireless Users: Not Available Items Loaned to/Received from Other Libraries: 6,106

Parks & Recreation February Monthly Report Parks & Recreation Highlights  Master Planning for Dover Park progressed with the bid award notification to Whitman, Requardt & Associates (WRA). Parks & Recreation staff will be meeting with WRA staff in early March to begin the Master Plan work.  Schutte Park Master Plans have moved towards the grading of the western lands for athletic field space. Once the fields are completed, we then plan to move forward with the looped trail system and installation of additional benches along the trail.  Bicentennial Playground is officially open! Tuesday, February 20th, Councilmen Polce, Lindell and Neal along with Mayor Christiansen, Levy Court Commissioner Jim Hosfelt, Dave Hugg, and Margery Cyr joined neighborhood families in a ribbon cutting ceremony. The children in attendance were very pleased with their new play equipment. This fun event made the front page of the Delaware State News!  Dover Treasure Hunt is taking shape. What is the Dover Treasure Hunt, you may ask. Members of the Bicycle & Pedestrian Subcommittee were looking for ways to promote walking within Dover. Letting our constituents know what great sites and amenities we have, right within walking distance. More details on this great family activity will be coming soon. Stay tuned... Bicycle/Pedestrian Subcommittee - The Subcommittee met February 6. Donna Mitchell and Councilmen Lewis attended this meeting. Members discussed pathway project, the upcoming Dover Duathlon and May’s Bike Month events. Members were encouraged to bring items before the Safety Advisory and Transportation committee prior to acting upon them. Silver Lake Commission - The Commission will meet again in March. Margery Cyr, Wayne Voshell and SLC member James Burcham visited the former Dover High School site to see if the parking stops could be used as in Silver Lake to replace the current bollards that align the east side of the park. Personnel and Training Updates - Sherwanda Speaks and Wayne Voshell attended annual DRPS conference on February 13 and 14 in Dewey Beach. For the Love of Parks was the 2018 theme, sessions included Master Planning for Sustainability, Heads Up on Concussions in Youth, Preparing for the Unanticipated & Problematic, Delivering World Class Customer Service. February Enrollment Summary 2000 Category FY18 FY17 FY18 FY17 1000 General Recreation 134 192 Sports 44 28 0 Trips 0 0 General Sports Trips Leagues Camps Recreation Leagues 960 1,012 Camps 30 28

Recreation Revenue Breakdown Revenue Breakdown February 2018 February 2017 General Recreation General Recreation Sports Sports Trips Trips Leagues Leagues Building & Field Rentals Building & Field Rentals Camps Camps Youth Connections/CSW Youth Connections/CSW General Recreation $767 General Recreation $1,517 Sports $510 Sports $420 Trips $768 Trips $1,155 Leagues $3,910 Leagues $3,135 Building & Field Rentals $280 Building & Field Rentals $120 Camps $670 Camps $520 Youth Connections/CSW $2,426 Youth Connections/CSW $606

John W. Pitts Recreation Center – February 2018 Total Program Attendance Facility Usage By The Hour 20,000 1,000 15,000 800 600 10,000 400 5,000 200 0 0 Feb 17 Feb 17 Mar 17 Mar 17 Apr 17 Apr 17 May 17 May 17 June 17 June 17 July 17 July 17 Aug 17 Aug 17 Sept 17 Sept 17 Oct 17 Oct 17 Nov 17 Nov 17 Dec 17 Dec 17 Jan 18 Jan 18 Feb 18 Feb 18 Facility Usage By The Hour February 2018 FYTD 18 February 2017 FYTD 17 Open Gym 310 2,719 289 2,624.5 Fitness Classes 15 166 38.5 248 Leagues 274 1,075.5 268 1,028 Camps 7 932 23 1,011.5 Sports Classes 25 57 48.5 133.5 Meetings & Rentals 27 212.5 20 112 Enrichment Classes 0 9 0 5.5 Total Facility Usage Hours 658 5,171 687 5,163 ** Program Attendance figures includes daily participants, parents and spectators in the facility. February Program Attendance** February 2018 FYTD 18 FYTD 17 2017 Total 13,568 51,986 13,912 48,955 Open Gym 297 2,283 572 2,772 Fitness Classes 57 605 150 957 Leagues 12,425 43,770 12,165 40,792 Camps 21 1,043 26 1,310 Sports Classes 403 1,060 893 2,032 Meetings & Rentals 365 3,082 106 1,064 Enrichment Classes 0 143 0 28 Since our opening in late April 2008, we have had 557,568 guests at the John W. Pitts Recreation Center.

PUBLIC WORKS Construction Inspection Subdivisions Site Development The following required inspection services The following required inspection services Seskinore Court The Grande, Building 4 Chestnut Grove Chesapeake Utilities Dover Campus Clearview Meadows Eden Hill Medical Center Eden Hill Reed Street Apartments Nottingham Meadows Leander Lakes Patriot Village Eden Hill Commercial Center Tall Pines Islamic Society of Central Delaware Whatcoat Apartments Panera Bread Blue Hen Apartments Enterprise Business Park Dover Christian Church Modern Maturity Center Longhorn Steak House Sanitation

FEBRUARY 18 FYTD 18 FEBRUARY 17 FYTD 17 Trips to DSWA Sandtown Landfill 162 1,607 166 1,377 Total Tonnage to DSWA 853 8,519 811 7,698 90-Gallon Containers Delivered 45 484 71 509 300-Gallon Containers Delivered 0 0 0 0 Total Man Hours-containers Delivered 25 172 35 220 CURBSIDE RECYCLING STATS TOTAL # OF TOTAL # OF HOUSEHOLDS ACCOUNTS WEIGHT/LBS. AVE. LBS. COLLECTED February 2018 19,180 9,590 230,380 12.01 Streets FEBRUARY 18 FYTD 18 FEBRUARY 17 FYTD 17 Signed Installed 1.00 80.00 85.00 153.00 Signs Repaired 9.00 65.00 16.00 95.00 Curbs Painted Yellow (feet) 0.00 1,118.00 0.00 3,296.00 New Post Installed 10.00 45.00 26.00 76.00 Storm Catch Basins Repaired 11.00 17.00 0.00 9.00 Storm Catch Basin Repairing (Hrs.) 59.00 103.50 0.00 13.50 Storm Catch Basins Cleaned 0.00 45.00 1.00 42.00 Storm Catch Basins Cleaning (Hrs.) 0.00 38.00 4.00 2,248.00 Hot Mix Patching (Tons) 0.00 13.60 0.00 2.41 Hot Mix Patching (Hrs.) 0.00 20.00 0.00 0.00 Cold Mix Patching Hrs.) 25.00 79.83 20.00 85.25 Concrete Work (Hrs) 9.00 165.50 26.00 52.00 Concrete Patching (Cubic Yards) 0.00 24.90 1.27 5.50 Ditch Work (Hrs). 0.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 Street and Alley Maintenance (Hrs) 2.50 56.50 28.50 45.00 Street Sweeping (Miles) 1,545.00 8,114.24 1,402.00 9,831.00 Street Sweeping (Cubic Yards) 116.00 677.25 102.00 840.00 Leaves Collected (Cubic Yards) 50.00 11,244.00 83.50 12.023 Leaf Collection (Miles) 52.00 5,934.00 55.00 7,605.00 GROUNDS Arborist Crew February 2018 February 2017 Trees Trimmed 30 41 Trees Removed 20 6 Stumps Removed 18 18 Trees Planted 0 0 Root Pruning 0 0

Beautification Crew Assisted arborist crew with trimming alleys. Trimmed grasses at library and Route 8 Point. Mowing Crew General cleanup for upcoming mowing season along mowing route. Assist arborist crew with trimming alleys. Litter Removal Litter is being picked up on City properties as per the weekly schedule Litter person has been diligent in the reporting of destruction in City parks Miscellaneous Serviced mowing equipment for upcoming season Continuing trimming alleys. Turned Christmas lights off on Loockerman St. Trim grasses at library Mulched pocket park North & Governors Ave. GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS (GIS) Planning & Inspections Modified Frisbee Golf application to have site plan information. Planning & Inspections Worked with Planning and Parks & Recreation to GPS the proposed Frisbee Golf course. Planning & Inspections Created a Downtown Development Incentives/Affordable Properties Map. Public Works Recreate Parcel and Zoning web application to a newer look and feel. Public Works Joined trash zone, community and centerline data for a snow removal project, Public Works Updating and adjusting the Water System GIS layers. 2 Hours everyday During February. Public Works Created Water, Storm Water, and Sanitary Sewer plan maps for Miss Utility tickets. Public Works Worked on Roads_Trash_Zones_Dover_Areas layer. Tax Assessor Sent a PDF copy of the up-to-date BID map to the requester along with a Spreadsheet of the parcels in each BID Zone.

FLEET AND FACILITIES MANAGEMENT Fleet Maintenance PM Work Orders Completed: 23 Number of Tire Repairs: 13 Number of Road Repairs: 3 Other Work Orders: 48 Repair Hours: 103.5 Road Repair Hours: 9 Total Work Orders: 70 Fabrication Hours: 2 Misc. Hours: 119 PM Hours: 78 # Of Scheduled PM’s: 34 # Of Scheduled PM’s: Completed: 14 Major Program Updates February February MEASURE 2018 2017 DIFFERENCE Fleet Maintenance - Scheduled Preventative 14 out of 34 21 out of 34 Maintenance appointments - 20.58 % 41.18 % 61.76 % being kept (Quantity and Percentage) Facilities Maintenance Facilities - Routine work orders 21 out of 21 25 out of 26 completed within 5 days + 3.85 % 100 % 96.15 % (Quantity and Percentage) Facilities - Emergency work orders completed within 2 1 out of 1 1 out of 1 0% days (Quantity and 100 % 100 % Percentage) Water/Wastewater Divisions Jan 17 Feb 17 March 17 April 17 May 17 June 17 July 17 Total Water Prod. 139,873,000 153,874,000 126,731,000 142,087,000 171,797,000 183,692,000 195,693,000 Billed Consumpt. 114,760,000 120,373,000 150,473,000 127,958,000 127,958,009 161,418,000 179,460,000 Total Flow to County 141,147,600 120,431,000 115,346,000 123,927,000 170,213,000 136,745,000 125,926,000 City Readings 142,470,400 134,835,733 148,506,989 135,076,400 168,499,897 141,349,551 138,366,768 Aug 17 Sept 17 Oct 17 Nov 17 Dec 17 Jan 18 Feb 18 Total Water Prod. 183,352,000 172,501,000 172,453,000 134,533,000 140,498,000 150,207,000 135,361,000 Billed Consumpt. 169,521,000 169,521,000 159,271,000 136,701,000 132,513,000 127,083,000 134,942,000 Total Flow to County 178,219,000 139,090,000 153,736,000 120,538,000 109,877,000 137,422,000 123,368,000 City Readings 167,858,838 144,462,028 168,885,523 123,758,466 121,387,764 143,955,874 132,879,690

ENGINEERING SUMMARY Major Program Updates FEBRUARY 18 FEBRUARY 17 DIFF FY18 YTD FY17 YTD State and Federal Violations 0 0 0 0 0 Water Quality Complaints 4 8 -4 67 75 Plan Review Completed Within 30 days of Submission 13 3 +10 71 48 OPERATIONAL SUMMARY Task FEBRUARY 18 FEBRUARY 17 CURRENT FY Water Production - Daily Average 4,834,321 4,426,107 Average Field Response Time (goal is <30 minutes) 16.00 21.00 16.80 Water Mains Repaired 0 0 7 Water Service Lines Repaired 4 0 12 Wastewater Mains Repaired 1 0 2 Wastewater Service Lines Repaired 2 1 5 Sewer Lines Flushed - linear feet 11,804 72,679 273,808 Sewer Mains Videoed -linear feet 474 462 7,119 Sewer Manholes Cleaned 59 377 932 Total Fire Hydrants in Service 1,839 1,839 18,39 Total Water Meters in City Distribution System 14,766 14,562 14,746

City Planner’s Monthly Report Department of Planning & Inspections FEBRUARY 2018 Planning & Inspections Highlights Some Items to Call to Your Attention: New Staff Members • Betty Sanchez joined the Code Enforcement Office as an Inspector I on January 29, 2018. • Nichole Arnold joined the Licensing Department as an Office Assistant II on February 12, 2018. Betty Nichole Activity Remains at High Levels With the start of 2018, construction activity in the residential and commer- cial sectors remains strong. This activity has lead to increased volumes of Plumbing and Mechanical Permits and Inspections. New residential construc- tion continues with one-family units and multi-family projects; eleven Build- ing Permits for new houses were issued in February and work continues at three apartment complexes. January and February has involved the Permitting & Licensing Staff pro- cessing the annual renewals for Rental Dwelling Permits and Public Occu- pancy Licenses. This includes over 900 Rental Dwelling Permits.

PROGRESS IN PICTURES 1289 Walker Road— Liberty Court 421 Northdown Drive—Village of Westover 280 Troon Road– Woodlands of Fox Hall 401 Shrewsberry Court– Blue Hen Apartments

986 Whatcoat Drive—The Preserve 306 Mary Street—Habitat for Humanity 1655 Kenton Road—Tall Pines 55+ Senior Living

Planning & Inspection Revenues FY ' 18 Actual Revenue Stream FY '18 Budget (YTD) February % of Budget Business License $1,467,000 $ 1,458,428 99% Trailer License $19,000 $ 17,556 92% Building Permits $800,000 $ 583,312 73% Cert. of Occupancy $13,000 $ 17,540 135% Public Occupancy $23,000 $ 20,622 90% Lodging House $14,000 $ 11,971 86% Plumbing/Heating/ 115% Air $115,000 $ 132,634 Rental Inspection 83% Fee $437,000 $ 363,122 Miscellaneous $27,000 $ 9,669 36% Fire Protection 91% Fees $65,000 $ 59,398 Code Enforcement 65% Fines $35,000 $ 22,575 Vacant Building 61% Reg. $250,000 $ 153,325 Total P&I Revenue $3,265,000 $ 2,850,152 87% 28-Feb-18 PERSONNEL AND TRAINING • Planning Staff attended LUCA (Local Update of Census Addresses) training associated with any upcoming project to compare the City addresses with Census address data in preparation for the 2020 Census. 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 February 2018, Planning Staff was involved with review of 46 Permits and 30 Certificates of Occupancy permits. This results in a 2018 calendar year-to-date total of 161 Permits and Certificates of Occupancy (2017 calendar year-to-date total of 114 Permits and COs com- pared to 116 for 2016). 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. • The Planning Office continues to be involved in the following studies and projects: Re- storing Central Dover Community Plan implementation and the Dover/Kent County MPO Regional Bicycle Plan Update project. The Final Report of the Downtown Dover Parking Study was issued in February. • Planning Staff continues work on reviewing Dover’s Downtown Development District program management. Planner Julian Swierczek is tasked with the administrative activi- ties and is focusing on updates to program outreach materials. • The Planning Office presented to City Council a Final Report on the Non-Conforming Uses in Residential Districts. 2019 Comprehensive Plan The Planning Office has begun the preparation discussion regarding the planning and re- search necessary for the update of the 2008 Comprehensive Plan. Construction Activity • Construction activities continue at several multi-family residential projects including Le- ander Lakes Apartments (S-12-18), Phase 2 of the Blue Hen Apartment Complex (S- 15-12), and the reconstruction of Liberty Court Apartments (S-16-22). • There is residential construction activity in Clearview Meadows PND, Nottingham Meadows, Village of Cannon Mill and Patriot Village. There were also four (4) permits issued for new houses on North Kirkwood Street and North New Street within the Down- town Development District area. • The Building Permit was issued for the construction of the physical rehabilitation hospi- tal project at 1240 McKee Road (S-17-05 Medcore). • Certificates of Occupancy were issued to five (5) one-family detached dwelling units and Temporary Certificates of Occupancy were issued to three (3) one-family detached dwell- ings and eight (8) townhouse units. • Certificates of Occupancy were issued for the completion of the renovations of Whatcoat Village Apartments and its new Clubhouse building (S-16-05). Temporary Certificates of Occupancy were issued for the Tall Pines project at 1655 and 1665 Kenton Road (S- 14-18) and there also was a Temporary Certificates issued to one apartment building in Liberty Court. FEBRUARY (2017) FY18 TOTAL FOR FY18 New Home Permits Issued 11 109 Value of Commercial Projects $11,002,750.00 $28,193,246.00 Downtown Incentives (Fees $6,380.00 $12,026.50 Waived)

BOARD AND COMMISSION ACTIVITY Planning Commission The Planning Commission met on February 20, 2017. The next Planning Commission meeting is sched- uled for March 19, 2018. • S-17-29 Delaware State University Residence Hall at 1200 N. DuPont Highway: Master Plan (Revised) – Planning Commission granted approval of the Update on Revisions to Site Plan and Building Architecture associated with the Site Development Master Plan application for the Resi- dence Hall project approved by the Planning Commission on November 20, 2017. The approval was contingent upon the applicant including sidewalk along the remaining portion of State College Road that does not currently have sidewalk and for the applicant to work with Staff on a functional way to accomplish that. The Site Development Master Plan has been Revised to consist of a new 192,141 S.F. five-story Student Residence Hall of 620 Beds (increased from 600 Beds and includ- ing refinement of building footprint with increase in building size) and architectural changes to ex- terior finishes. • C-18-01 Governors Café Kitchen Addition at 144 Kings Highway SW – Planning Commission granted conditional approval of the Conditional Use Site Plan Application to permit the construc- tion of a one-story, 344 SF addition to the kitchen for the Governors Cafe. • S-18-01 DGKP Property: Office/Warehouse at 1351 West North Street – Planning Commission granted conditional approval of a Office/Warehouse project to include approval of the waiver for the partial elimination of the upright curbing and approval of the elimination of the opaque barrier on the basis of the comments and considerations voiced and based upon the applicant’s agreement to work with Staff to make sure this happens. The approval was amended to include that the opaque barrier is contingent upon a minimum three-foot berm from either top curb or near the edge of pav- ing to be landscaped to Staff’s satisfaction. The Commission acknowledges that the Site Plan and application is in compliance with the Performance Review Standards. • SB-18-01 Minor Subdivision Plan for 747 North DuPont Highway – Planning Commission granted conditional approval of the Minor Subdivision Plan application for the subdivision of a 25.01 +/- acre parcel into: Lot 1 of 10.007 acres and Lot 2 of 15.004 acres. • MI-18-01 Text Amendments: Zoning Ordinance, Article 3 Section 28 for Fuel Pumps as Condition- al Use in TND zone - Planning Commission recommended approval to City Council on Text Amendments to the Appendix B: Zoning Ordinance, Article 3 – District Regulations. The proposed Ordinance is to amend Section 28 - Traditional Neighborhood Design Zone (TND), Subsection 28.52 – Neighborhood Commercial District. The proposed text revision seeks to allow fuel pumps as Conditional Use as accessory to a convenience retail store and subject to the requirements of Ar- ticle 10, Section 1 – Approval of Conditional Uses. • S-17-28 Multiplex at 299 College Road: Review of Cash-in-lieu of Active Recreation Area Pay- ment – Planning Commission granted approval of the payment amount of $4000 for the Cash-in- lieu of Active Recreation Area construction as associated with the Site Development Plan to permit construction of a three (3) unit multiplex residential building (multi-family dwelling) with adjoining parking spaces. Board of Adjustment The Board of Adjustment did not meet on February 21, 2018. The next regular scheduled meeting of the Board of Adjustment is scheduled for March 21, 2018. Historic District Commission The Historic District Commission met on February 15, 2018. The next Historic District Commission meeting is scheduled for March 15, 2018. There were no applications.

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM CDBG FY17 Projects Homeownership Assistance Program CDBG funds will be used to provide homeownership assistance to first-time homebuyers who purchase affordable housing in the City of Dover. Three (3) families have pur- chased affordable housing in the City of Dover, and two (2) families are scheduled to go to settlement in late March. Dover Interfaith Mission for Housing CDBG funds will be used to provide operation costs for the shelter. This project is un- derway. Dover Interfaith has partnered with the property owner of 2-4 Forest Street to ac- quire affordable housing for homeless men. Connections Community Support Program CDBG funds will be used to provide rapid re-housing/rental assistance services for homeless households within the City. Two families has been provided rental assistance for affordable housing and one (1) motel voucher has been issued for emergency housing for one family. Milford Housing Homeowner Rehabilitation/Emergency Home Repair Programs CDBG funds will be used to rehabilitate existing owner occupied housing in the City that is in violation of the City’s Housing Code and complete emergency home repairs to elim- inate housing conditions that threaten the health and safety of low income homeowners. Five (5) families have received emergency home repairs, and bids have been advertised for one (1) single family home to be fully renovated. Habitat for Humanity CDBG funds will be used to complete exterior renovations to existing owner-occupied homes in the Restoring Central Dover Revitalization area. This project is underway. NSP Program The City provided $59,000 in NSP grant funds to Diamond State Community Land Trust to assist in acquiring a vacant or foreclosed property in the City of Dover. This property has been fully renovated and will be sold to a low to moderate income family. This prop- erty is a townhouse located in the Village of Westover. This property is scheduled to go to settlement by the end of March.

Code Enforcement Activity—FEBRUARY Case Type # cases current # cases % staff initiated % staff initiated month YTD (July current month YTD to Decem- ber) No valid Rental Permit 10 21 20% 65% No valid Building Permit 8 52 100% 84% Tall grass and weeds 0 190 0% 75% Unregistered vehicle 10 77 60% 70% Abandoned vehicle 9 26 33% 64% Annual Housing Inspection 48 193 90% 84% Property Maintenance – 39 205 49% 55% Exterior Electric Termination 14 70 100% 95% Dover Code of Ordinances 48 214 42% 60% Zoning 5 20 25% 71% Total Cases Opened 191 1067 Total # of Inspections For 314 Month 938 Shank Road—Interior Condemnation

Dangerous Buildings, Vacant Buildings & Demolitions  954 Lincoln Street—The property was condemned and taken forward to City Council as a dangerous building on November 7, 2016. Council ordered the owner to demolish the structure by December 7, 2016. The asbestos survey and abatement have been completed. The mortgage company has requested time to make renovations. No repairs have been made as of December. The demolition specifications have been submitted for review by City Staff.  1175 Horsepond Road—The property was condemned on November 14, 2016 due to the dilapidated condition of the home. Notice was sent to the owner to repair or demolish the structure by February 23, 2017, or City Staff would take the property forward to City Council as a dangerous building. Property was presented to City Council on March 6, 2017; Council declared the property dangerous and ordered the owner to demolish by April 7, 2017. The owner is working to have the building demolished.  803 Westview Terrace—The in-ground swimming pool has been condemned. Notice has been sent to all lien holders regarding the code violations to the in-ground swimming pool. Staff took this property to City Council on August 7, 2017 as a dangerous building and Council ordered the Owner to demolish the pool by September 7, 2017, or City Staff would have the pool demolished. Notice has been sent to the lien holders to remove all items related to the pool removed and demolition specifications are being worked on.  2292 White Oak Road—The dwelling was condemned as unfit for human occupancy and notice was sent to the owner to repair or demolish the structure. City Staff took this prop- erty to City Council on August 7, 2017 as a dangerous building and Council ordered the Owner to demolish the house by September 7, 2017, or City Staff would have the struc- ture demolished. Notice has been sent to the lien holders to remove all items from the property that they wish too keep. The demolition specifications are due in February.  526 Fulton Street—The dwelling is condemned and a lien search has been requested. At the council meeting on January 2, 2018, City Council approved staff’s recommendation for demolition of the structure. Notice was sent to all lien holders to make repairs to the dwelling by February 2, 2018, or the City Staff would have the structure demolished.  113 Davis Circle— The dwelling is condemned and a lien search has been requested. At the council meeting on January 2, 2018, City Council approved staff’s recommendation for the demolition of the structure. Notice was sent to all lien holders to make repairs to the dwelling by February 2, 2018, or City Staff would have the structure demolished.  Vacant Buildings—During the month of February, twenty (20) additional buildings were registered as vacant, and $12,750.00 in vacant building registration fees were collected.

Building Inspections & Licensing Summary July 2017– July 2016— Current February 2018 February 2017 February 2017 PERMITTING AND LICENSING Permits Issued FEB (2018) FEB (2017) FY 18 FYTD 18 FY17 FYTD 17 Administrative Permit 2 22 1 12 Building Addition/Renovation Permits 18 202 22 235 Building Permits 18 190 18 207 Demolition Permits 2 22 4 23 Fence Permits 5 69 4 55 Fire Prevention Permits 8 84 2 75 Mechanical Permits 93 420 14 321 Plumbing Permits 69 433 17 313 Sign Permits 13 98 10 123 Swimming Pool Permits 1 3 0 5 Subtotal 1543 1369 Business Licenses 20 2073 26 2128 Merchant Licenses 1 368 6 365 Contractor Licenses 29 1143 23 1204 Subtotal 3584 3697 Lodging House Licenses 2 2 6 45 Public Occupancy 80 128 102 375 Rental Dwelling 937 1020 922 2807 Subtotal 1150 3227 Manufactured Homes 1 363 4 433 BUILDING INSPECTIONS Inspections FEB (2018) FEB (2017) FY 18 FYTD 18 FY17 FYTD 17 Building (Inspections/CBI/Site Meetings) 806 3772 374 3137 Plumbing/Mechanical 1016 4668 365 3502 Certificate of Occupancy 30 176 15 127

Fire Marshal’s Office—At a Glance The Fire Marshal’s Office investigated a total of three (3) incidents during the month of Febru- ary. Staff attended training in regards to the 2000 Seton Hall dormitory fire. We are continuing public office building inspec- tions, reinspection's, and monthly daycares. Dover Police made an arrest in regards to an Ar- son fire which occurred on 12/26/17 at Delmarva Kenworth. Month Year to Date Previous Year to Date Annual Fire & Life Safety Inspections 40 157 188 Deficiencies From the Above Inspections 163 676 684 Fire Code Violations/Deficiencies/Complaints 16 220 288 C/O & Fire Equipment Acceptance Tests 14 98 110 Meetings & Walk Through 20 150 161 Fire Plan Review & DAC 19 127 98 Month Year to Date Previous Year to Date Accidental 1 totaling $7,500 21 totaling $201,600 $562,003 Undetermined 2 totaling $27,500 4 totaling $2,542,500 $775,501 Incendiary 0 18 totaling $284,002 $121,600 Arrest Made with DPD 1 1 - Investigation Time 14 hours 126 hours - Injuries 0 1 - Deaths 0 0 - Please feel free to contact our office at any time with any questions or concerns. Thank you!

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 FEBRUARY 2018 FINANCE DEPARTMENT ACTIVITY LEVELS FY17 YTD FY18 YTD BANK TRENDS Number of Deposits Made (Hand, ACH & Wire, Lockbox) 4,716 4,483 Total Amount of All Deposits $ 90,868,356 $ 90,794,271 Other Activity Number of Pay Periods 17 17 Number of Payroll Checks & Direct Deposits Issued 6,841 6,586 Number of Pension Checks Issued 2,019 2,041 Total Pension Benefits Paid - Defined Benefit Plan $ 3,482,902 $ 3,183,055 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE Number of Check Vouchers 3,912 4,279 Number of EFT Vouchers 1,762 1,711 Vouchers Dollar Amount Disbursed $ 45,156,752 $ 50,698,883 FY17 YTD Wages FY18 YTD Wages $113,992 $133,864 $483,464 $165,257 $115,218 $545,416 $511,535 $566,191 $322,993 $384,016 $905,331 $889,413 $1,029,559 $873,504 $11,153,666 $10,932,754 Regular Regular All over time All over time Vacation Vacation Sick Sick Terminal Leave - Retiree Vacation/Sick Payout Personal Terminal Leave - Retiree Vacation/Sick Payout Other Comp Time Personal Comp Time

City of Dover General Fund Summary Fiscal Year to Date (February 2018) Revenues Budget Actual % Property & Transfer Taxes $ 14,234,900 $ 14,381,569 101% Program Revenues 10,834,900 7,431,069 69% Utility Transfers 10,900,000 8,946,668 82% Grants 605,000 297,813 49% Interfund Services 5,376,200 3,423,064 64% All Other* 980,000 574,896 59% $ 42,931,000 $ 35,055,079 82% *Includes: Franchise Fees, Miscellaneous Revenues, Garrison Farm Rent, Verizon Grant and Other Reserves Expenditures Budget Actual % Program Expenditures $ 26,724,500 $ 15,898,248 59% Interfund Services 9,553,300 5,786,130 61% Debt Service 443,100 305,349 69% Post Retirement Benefits 2,063,000 1,376,000 67% Pension Fund Contributions 1,224,900 792,989 65% Capital Project Transfers 1,368,700 1,026,350 75% All Other* 1,483,500 741,519 50% $ 42,861,000 $ 25,926,585 60% *Includes: DDP Contribution, Misc. Grant Exp., Bank and CC Fees, Street Lights Expense, Inventory write-offs, & Uncollectibles: Trash and Other, Other Employment Exp. General Fund Revenues $16,000,000 $14,000,000 $12,000,000 $10,000,000 $8,000,000 $6,000,000 $4,000,000 $2,000,000 $- Property & Program Utility Transfers Grants Interfund All Other* Transfer Taxes Revenues Services Budget Actual General Fund Expenditures $30,000,000 $25,000,000 $20,000,000 $15,000,000 $10,000,000 $5,000,000 $- Budget Actual

City of Dover Water/Wastewater Fund Summary Fiscal Year to Date (February 2018) Revenues Budget Actual % Customer Sales $ 14,535,200 $ 9,276,270 64% Impact Fees 440,000 1,518,173 345% Rents 391,400 241,628 62% Miscellaneous 72,400 46,587 64% $ 15,439,000 $ 11,082,658 72% Expenditures Budget Actual % Program Expenses $ 3,896,800 $ 2,289,691 59% Kent County Treatment Fee 3,926,500 2,533,229 65% Interfund Services 1,716,100 1,094,103 64% Debt Service 1,137,400 648,596 57% Post Retirement Benefits 249,700 161,480 65% Capital Project Transfers 3,200,000 2,400,000 75% General Fund Transfer 900,000 608,000 68% All Other* 91,900 18,665 20% $ 15,118,400 $ 9,753,764 65% *Includes: Bank & CC Fees, Bond Issuance Cost, Other Employment Expenses Water/Wastewater Revenues $16,000,000 $14,000,000 $12,000,000 $10,000,000 $8,000,000 $6,000,000 $4,000,000 $2,000,000 $- Customer Sales Impact Fees Rents Miscellaneous Budget Actual Water/Wastewater Expenses $4,500,000 $4,000,000 $3,500,000 $3,000,000 $2,500,000 $2,000,000 $1,500,000 $1,000,000 $500,000 $- Program Kent County Interfund Debt Service Post Capital Project General Fund All Other* Expenses Treatment Fee Services Retirement Transfers Transfer Benefits Budget Actual

City of Dover Electric Fund Summary Fiscal Year to Date (February 2018) Revenues Budget Actual % Customer Sales $ 80,892,200 $ 57,045,838 71% Distribution of Earnings (6,176,700) (4,388,535) 71% All Other* 982,000 610,483 62% $ 75,697,500 $ 53,267,786 70% *Includes: Weyandt Hall Rents, Miscellaneous Revenue, Interest Earnings Expenditures Budget Actual % Power Supply & Generation $ 49,075,100 $ 31,683,663 65% Electric Operating Division Exp. 6,660,200 3,845,267 58% Interfund Services 3,660,100 2,328,961 64% Debt Service 1,605,500 1,076,718 67% Post Retirement Benefits 1,820,300 1,363,500 75% Pension Unfunded Liability 1,000,000 756,000 76% Capital Project Transfers 5,000,000 1,250,000 25% General Fund Transfer 10,000,000 8,338,668 83% Rate Stabilization Reserve 5,200,000 - 0% All Other* 2,162,400 1,448,993 67% $ 86,183,600 $ 52,091,770 60% *Includes: Bank & CC Fees, Utility Tax, Interest on Deposit, Legal Exp., Green Energy, A/R Write-offs, Contractual Services, Other Employment Expenses Megawatt Hours Sold & Purchased Budget Actual Sales to Customers MWh (excl. Street Light MWh) 713,501 513,883 Sales per MWh $102.98 $100.81 Purchased/Generated MWh 763,129- 525,745- All In MWh Supply & Generation $64.31 $60.24 Electric Fund - Revenues Millions $(20) $(10) $- $10 $20 $30 $40 $50 $60 $70 $80 $90 Budget Actual Customer Sales Distribution of Earnings All Other* Electric Fund - Expenditures $55,000,000 $50,000,000 $45,000,000 $40,000,000 $35,000,000 $30,000,000 $25,000,000 $20,000,000 $15,000,000 $10,000,000 $5,000,000 $- Power Electric Post Pension Capital General Rate Interfund Supply & Operating Debt Service Retirement Unfunded Project Fund Stabilization All Other* Services Generation Division Exp. Benefits Liability Transfers Transfer Reserve Budget $49,075,10 6,660,200 3,660,100 1,605,500 1,820,300 1,000,000 5,000,000 10,000,000 5,200,000 2,162,400 Actual $31,683,66 3,845,267 2,328,961 1,076,718 1,363,500 756,000 1,250,000 8,338,668 - 1,448,993 Budget Actual

City of Dover Division Expense Summary (General Fund) Fiscal Year to Date (February 2018) Budget Actual % General Fund Divisions % of Budget City Clerk $ 436,700 $ 260,316 60% Council 155,100 68,065 44% Mayor Tax Assessor 238,500 149,760 63% Human Resources Fire 774,900 515,601 67% Customer Services Grounds 1,142,000 598,325 52% Vehicle Maintenance Library 1,708,300 1,086,884 64% Procurement & Inventory Recreation 764,200 462,992 61% Life Safety 499,600 273,821 55% Engineering Code Enforcement 449,700 252,964 56% Facilities Management Planning 563,400 330,503 59% Pub. Services Administration Public Inspections 721,000 351,129 49% Finance Police 16,483,900 10,107,023 61% Information Technology Police Extra Duty 560,000 220,654 39% City Manager Streets 1,119,400 585,278 52% Sanitation 2,563,900 1,407,354 55% Sanitation City Manager 751,500 443,439 59% Streets Information Technology 777,400 557,703 72% Police Extra Duty Finance 1,038,900 637,784 61% Police Pub. Services Administration 718,300 439,718 61% Public Inspections Facilities Management 629,700 394,007 63% Engineering 277,700 154,285 56% Planning Procurement & Inventory 605,100 384,606 64% Code Enforcement Vehicle Maintenance 838,200 524,464 63% Life Safety Customer Services 1,169,500 620,574 53% Recreation Human Resources 436,600 277,936 64% Library Mayor 119,300 52,078 44% Grounds $ 35,542,800 $ 21,157,263 Fire Tax Assessor Council City Clerk 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%

City of Dover Utilities Summary Fiscal Year to Date (February 2018) Water/Wastewater Divison Expenses Budget Actual % Engineering & Inspection $ 517,800 $ 265,785 51% Water Department 635,700 322,364 51% Water Treatment Plant 1,780,500 1,121,428 63% Wastewater Department 962,800 580,114 60% $ 3,896,800 $ 2,289,691 Electric Division Expenses Budget Actual % Transmission/Distribution $ 3,599,600 $ 2,180,552 61% Electrical Engineering 1,226,400 667,492 54% Administration 797,000 344,565 43% Meter Reading 392,500 242,399 62% Systems Operations 644,700 410,259 64% $ 6,660,200 $ 3,845,267 Water/Wastewater Division % of Budget Wastewater Department Water Treatment Plant Water Department Engineering & Inspection 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% Electric Division % of Budget Systems Operations Meter Reading Administration Electrical Engineering Transmission/Distribution 0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

City of Dover Capital Outlay Summary (All Funds) Fiscal Year to Date (February 2018) Capital Outlay - All Divisions General Fund Budget Actual % 2,500,000 City Clerk $ - $ 156,188 0% Fire 145,700 145,614 100% 2,000,000 Grounds Maintenance 62,500 - 0% Recreation 271,000 17,814 7% 1,500,000 Police 379,900 275,698 73% Sanitation - 39,994 0% 1,000,000 Streets 1,070,000 841,938 79% Information Technology 36,600 54,079 148% 500,000 Facilities Management 25,100 - 0% Transfer to Parkland Reserve - 25,723 0% - General Fund Capital Projects $ 1,990,800 $ 1,557,047 78% Water/Wastewater Fund Water $ 1,608,400 $ 77,245 5% Wastewater 1,543,000 717,115 46% Water Treatment Plant - 7,703 Bu dget Act ual Water/Wastewater Capital Projects $ 3,151,400 $ 802,063 25% Electric Fund Capital Outlay - By Fund Electric Generation $ 2,328,000 $ 546,678 23% $8,000,000 Transmission/Distribution 1,725,500 750,245 43% $7,000,000 Electrical Engineering 1,315,000 423,791 32% $6,000,000 Metering - 35,986 0% $5,000,000 Electric Administration 8,500 - 0% ERP System 1,500,000 815,816 54% $4,000,000 Electric Capital Projects $ 6,877,000 $ 2,572,516 37% $3,000,000 Total Capital Projects $ 12,019,200 $ 4,931,626 41% $2,000,000 $1,000,000 $- Budget Actual Gen eral Fun d C api tal Pro je cts W ater/ Wa stew ater Ca pit al P rojects El ect ric C api tal Pro je cts

February 2018 Procurement & Inventory Report Measure FY 2018 FY 2017 DIFFERENCE Issue Effectiveness – How often the FY 2018 (To date) FY 2017 (Total) warehouse has what the departments [2,908/(2,908+109)]*100 [4,581/(4,581+119)]*100 - 1.08% need when it’s needed. 96.39% 97.47 % [issues / (issues + back orders)] * 100 Turn Over Rate – Indicates that the material stocked is the material being February 2018 February 2017 +0.29 Turnovers per year used. (2016-2017 Goal 1 per year) 1.01 Turnovers per year 0.72 Turnovers per year WITHOUT TRANSFORMERS REQ UESTING CO MMO DITY BID NUMBER TERM STATUS as of March 8, 2018 DEPARTMENT Ambulance Services for the City of City Manager's Forwarded to Kay Sass on 18-0010CM Three Years Dover Office 12/19/2017 Scheduled for City Council on Diversity and Inclusion 18-0012HR One time Human Resources 3/12/2018 Water Treatment Plant Process Bids forwarded to Public Works on 18-0014PW One time Public Works Improvements 12/26/2017 Professional Support for HVAC Only one RFP received. Forwarded 18-0015PW One time Public Works Repair Design Weyandt Hall to Public Works on 12/13/2017. Electric Utility Management & City Manager's Awarded to Avant Energy by Benchmarking Assessment for the 18-0016CM One time Office Council on 02/26/2018. City of Dover Electric Utility Construction Support Services for Forwarded to Public Works on 18-0018PW One time Public Works the Water Treatment Plant Project 2/7/2018 Forwarded to Inspections on Demolition of 954 Lincoln Street 18-0019PI One time Inspections 2/7/2018 Demolition of 2292 White Oak Forwarded to Inspections on 18-0020PI One time Inspections Road 2/7/2018 Puncheon Run Wastewater Pump RFP opening scheduled for March Station Improvements Engineering 18-0023PW One time Public Works 14, 2018 @ 2:00 pm Design Support Electric Distribution Transformer RFP opening scheduled for April 10, 18-0024EL One Time Electric Disposal 2018 @ 2:00 pm FUEL USE FY 2017 TO DATE FY 2018 TO DATE STOCK WITH OVER 60 MONTH SUPPLY (5 YEARS) Unleaded: 87,908 gallons 86,583 gallons Electric: $ 435,876.76 313 Line Items Diesel: 53,171 gallons 49,649 gallons Water: $ 19,536.86 52 Line Items Dollars Spent: $227,458.73 $244,619.82 General: $ 36,181.73 145 Line Items Total: $ 491,595.35 510 Line Items Purchase Orders for Stock by Fund Issues from Stock by Fund FY 2017 TO DATE FY 2018 TO DATE FY 2017 TO DATE FY 2018 TO DATE Electric: $ 733,332.52 $ 958,524.94 Electric: $744,299.66 $1,071,061.65 Water: $ 185,084.19 $ 91,577.10 Water: $186,252.18 $ 88,924.66 General: $ 72,455.15 $ 84,725.26 General: $ 81,619.99 $ 83,228.02 Total: $ 990,871.86 $1,134,827.30 *Total: $1,012,238.03 $1,243,283.38 Warehouse Stock Money Spent for Postage/Postal Services FY 2017 FY 2018 FY 2017 TO DATE FY 2018 TO DATE Total Dollar Value: $ 2,387,169.57 $ 2,077,106.41 $81,633.72 $77,846.39 Total Line Items: 1,320 1,301 • Total of Issues from Stock by Fund includes Issues from Sale from Stock (SS) and Electric Returns (ER).

DEPARTMENT OF POLICE Marvin C. Mailey 400 South Queen Street Chief of Police Dover, Delaware 19904 302-736-7111 Fax: 302-672-1842 April 9, 2018 Honorable Robin Christiansen, Mayor Member of Dover City Council City Hall Dover, DE 19901 Mayor Christiansen and Council Members: The following is the monthly report for Dover Police Department activities for the month of February 2018: COMPLAINTS Total complaints received through February 28, 2018, numbered 6,893 this is an increase of 283 complaints over the same period last year. 8,000 6,610 6,893 6,564 6,000 5,025 5,167 4,000 2,000 0 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIONS 10 8 8 8 6 6 5 5 5 4 4 4 3 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 Burglary Robbery Rape Homicide Sudden Death Cases Reported in February Cases Cleared In February Cases Cleared from Previous Months 1|P ag e

DRUGS, VICE, & ORGANIZED CRIME (DVOC) AND STREET CRIMES SECTION SEIZURES Along with the drug seizures below, the units also recovered 3.0 grams of miscellaneous other drugs and $3,648.00 USD during the month of February. 150.00 116.90 119 100.00 36.8 50.00 0 0.99 0.00 Marijuana Cocaine Ecstasy (Doses) Prescription Pills Heroin (Doses) GRAMS/DOSES FIREARM SEIZURES 6 5 5 4 3 2 2 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CI DVOC/STREET CRIMES PATROL SEU HANDGUN RIFLE SHOTGUN COMMUNITY POLICING COMMUNITY POLICING CONTACTS ABANDONED VEHICLES 4 ALCOHOL VIOLATIONS/DUI’S 0 ASSIST OTHER 62 WARRANTS ON FILE 0 CRIMINAL ARRESTS 0 PARKING DCO’S 41 CADETS CONTACTS LOUD MUSIC 0 DCO’S 126 MISCELLANEOUS DCO’S 4 PARKING 87 PARKING COMPLAINTS 0 SMOKING 8 PEDDLER 0 OPEN CONTAINER 13 COMMUNITY OUTREACH 93 LOUD NOISE 0 CRIME PREVENTION CHECK 3 OTHER DCO’s 18 TRAFFIC ARRESTS 0 PROPERTY CHECKS 88 BIKE PATROL 0 BUSINESS CONTACTS 239 PROPERTY CHECKS 122 LIBRARY CHECKS 23 WARNINGS 2 COMPLAINTS ASSIGNED 29 TOTAL CONTACTS 331 SPECIAL EVENT 3 TOTAL CONTACTS 634 2|P ag e

STREET CRIMES STREET CRIMES ENFORCEMENT CONTACTS ABANDONED VEHICLES 0 ALCOHOL VIOLATIONS/DUI'S 0 ASSIST OTHER 4 WARRANTS ON FILE 0 CITY PARK VIOLATIONS 0 CRIMINAL ARRESTS 47 DRUG RELATED ARRESTS 12 LOUD MUSIC 0 MISCELLANEOUS VIOLATIONS 0 PARKING VIOLATIONS 0 PEDDLER 0 MEETINGS 0 CURFEW CHECKS 100 CRIME PREVENTION CHECKS 0 TRAFFIC ARRESTS 12 WARNINGS 45 FUGITIVES 6 DCO'S 0 PROSTITUTION 0 TOTAL CONTACTS 226 TRAFFIC ARRESTS The department issued 1,745 traffic citations through this reporting period; this is a decrease of 718 citations over the number issued during the same period last year. 3,000 2,666 2,628 2,463 2,500 2,248 2,000 1,745 1,500 1,000 500 0 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 3|P ag e

TRAFFIC CRASHES Through February 28, 2018, the Dover Police investigated 280 traffic crashes, a decrease of 12 crashes investigated during the same period last year. 330 322 320 310 300 292 290 285 279 280 280 270 260 250 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 911 Center During the month of February, the Dover Police Department handled 7,188 calls averaging 257calls per day. Dispatchers handled 1,756 on the 911 wireless lines, 442 on the 911 landlines, and 207 on the Voice over Internet Protocol lines, the remaining 4,783 were administrative calls. 24% 67% 6% 3% 911 Wireless 911 Landline VoIP Administrative CITY ORDINANCE SUMMONS Through February 28, 2018, we issued 939 city ordinance summons, a decrease of 140 summonses for the same period last year. Note: Of those summonses issued in February, 5 DCO’s were issued for handicapped parking violations and 0 for fire lane parking violations, 134 for false alarms 121 for 1-2 alarms, 10 for 3-5 alarms, 1 for 6-9 alarms, 2 for 10-15 alarms, and 0 for 16 or more alarms) and 3 for noise violations 0 for vehicle violations and 3 for residence violations). 1,200 1,094 1,079 1,006 990 939 1,000 746 800 585 528 558 600 385 400 200 0 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 ISSUED 1,094 1,006 990 1,079 939 PAID 528 746 558 585 385 4|P ag e

SEX OFFENDER STATISTICS/FEBRUARY MONTHLY NON COMPLIANT VERIFICATIONS NOTIFICATIONS REVERIFICATIONS WARRANTS TIER 1 0 0 0 0 TIER 2 12 1116 32 3 TIER 3 5 465 24 2 ACTIVE SEX OFFENDERS THAT RESIDE IN THE CITY OF DOVER (please note, Tier 1 offenders are not contacted by Dover Police Sex Offender Agents). 250 195 199 200 150 100 80 72 50 0 JANUARY FEBRUARY TIER 2 195 199 TIER 3 80 72 (Please note, Tier 1 offenders are not contacted by Dover Police Sex Offender Agents). Please visit our website at www.doverpolice.org for up to date information on crimes and activities in the City of Dover. Respectfully Submitted, Marvin C. Mailey Chief of Police 5|P ag e

First Reading CITY OF DOVER ORDINANCE # 2018-02 2017-2018 BUDGET ORDINANCES 1 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: 2 The amount hereinafter named aggregating Forty Nine Million Three Thousand Two Hundred dollars 3 ($49,003,200) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues 4 and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year 5 beginning July 1, 2017 and ending June 30, 2018: 6 GENERAL FUND 7 CASH RECEIPT SUMMARY FOR 2017-2018 8 2017/18 2017/18 9 BUDGET REVISED 10 BEGINNING BALANCE $ 4,597,100 $ 6,072,200 11 RECEIPTS 12 FINES AND POLICE REVENUE 746,600 746,600 13 LIBRARY REVENUES 100,000 100,000 14 KENT COUNTY BOOK REIMBURSEMENT 300,000 300,000 15 BUSINESS LICENSES 1,467,000 1,467,000 16 PERMITS AND OTHER FEES 1,956,000 1,956,000 17 MISCELLANEOUS CHARGES 57,000 57,000 18 POLICE EXTRA DUTY 500,000 500,000 19 PROPERTY TAXES 13,025,600 13,025,600 20 RECREATION REVENUE 150,000 150,000 21 FRANCHISE FEE 688,100 688,100 22 SANITATION FEES 3,080,400 3,080,400 23 RENT REVENUE - GARRISON FARM 96,900 96,900 24 COURT OF CHANCERY FEES 1,350,000 1,350,000 25 INVESTMENT INCOME 138,000 138,000 26 RECEIPTS SUBTOTAL 23,655,600 23,655,600 27 INTERFUND SERVICE RECEIPTS 28 INTERFUND SERVICE RECEIPTS W/WW 1,716,100 1,716,100 29 INTERFUND SERVICE RECEIPTS ELECTRIC 3,660,100 3,660,100 30 INTERFUND SERVICE RECEIPTS SUBTOTAL 5,376,200 5,376,200 31 GRANTS: 32 POLICE RELATED/EXTRA DUTY 60,000 60,000 33 POLICE PENSION GRANT 415,000 415,000 34 GREEN ENERGY GRANT 98,500 98,500 35 MISC GRANT REVENUE 25,000 31,500 36 HISTORIC DISTRICT GRANT 6,500 37 GRANTS SUBTOTAL 605,000 605,000 38 TRANSFERS FROM: 39 TRANSFER TAX 1,209,300 1,209,300 40 MUNICIPAL STREET AID 673,100 673,100 41 CIVIL TRAFFIC PENALTIES 511,800 511,800 42 WATER/WASTEWATER 900,000 900,000 43 ELECTRIC 10,000,000 10,000,000 44 TRANSFERS FROM SUBTOTAL 13,294,200 13,294,200 45 TOTAL REVENUES 42,931,000 42,931,000 46 TOTAL BEGINNING BALANCE & REVENUE $ 47,528,100 $ 49,003,200 1

First Reading 47 2017-2018 BUDGET ORDINANCES - FIRST AMENDMENT 48 GENERAL FUND - EXPENDITURES AND BUDGET BALANCE FOR 2017-2018 49 2017/18 2017/18 50 DEPARTMENT EXPENSES BUDGET REVISED 51 CITY CLERK $ 436,700 $ 440,700 52 COUNCIL 155,100 145,100 53 TAX ASSESSOR 238,500 241,200 54 FIRE 774,900 774,900 55 GROUNDS MAINTENANCE 1,142,000 1,101,200 56 LIBRARY 1,708,300 1,715,800 57 RECREATION 764,200 811,500 58 LIFE SAFETY 499,600 500,900 59 CODE ENFORCEMENT 449,700 452,100 60 PLANNING 563,400 568,000 61 INSPECTIONS 721,000 724,800 62 POLICE 16,483,900 16,713,300 63 POLICE EXTRA DUTY 560,000 560,000 64 STREETS 1,119,400 1,202,100 65 SANITATION 2,563,900 2,566,600 66 CITY MANAGER 751,500 820,500 67 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 777,400 781,200 68 FINANCE 1,038,900 1,038,900 69 PUBLIC WORKS - ADMINISTRATION 718,300 720,100 70 FACILITIES MANAGEMENT 629,700 633,200 71 PUBLIC WORKS - ENGINEERING 277,700 278,800 72 PROCUREMENT & INVENTORY 605,100 610,600 73 FLEET MAINTENANCE 838,200 840,200 74 CUSTOMER SERVICE 1,169,500 1,174,700 75 HUMAN RESOURCES 436,600 538,600 76 MAYOR 119,300 119,300 77 DEPARTMENT SUBTOTALS 35,542,800 36,074,300 78 OTHER EXPENSES 79 DEBT SERVICE 443,100 443,100 80 CONTRIBUTION TO DDP 150,000 150,000 81 MISCELLANEOUS GRANT RELATED EXP 25,000 25,000 82 INSURANCE 735,000 735,000 83 RETIREES HEALTH CARE 2,063,000 2,063,000 84 OTHER EMPLOYMENT EXPENSES 367,500 70,900 85 BANK & CREDIT CARD FEES 21,000 21,000 86 UNCOLLECTIBLES - TRASH AND OTHER 100,000 100,000 87 STREET LIGHTS 810,000 810,000 88 OTHER EXPENSE SUBTOTAL 4,714,600 4,418,000 89 TRANSFERS 90 TRANSFER TO CAPITAL FUND - PROJECTS 1,368,700 1,368,700 91 TRANSFER TO THE CAPITAL ASSET RESERVE - 214,700 92 APPROP. TO THE POLICE PENSION FUND 761,500 811,500 93 APPROP. POLICE PENSION - STATE GRANT 415,000 415,000 94 APPROP. TO THE GENERAL PENSION FUND 48,400 619,000 95 TRANSFER TO INVENTORY WRITE-OFFS 10,000 10,000 96 TRANSFERS SUBTOTAL 2,603,600 3,438,900 97 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 42,861,000 43,931,200 98 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE 4,667,100 5,072,000 99 TOTALS $ 47,528,100 $ 49,003,200 100 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make 101 interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any 102 department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. 103 ADOPTED: 2

First Reading 104 2017-2018 BUDGET ORDINANCES 105 GOVERNMENTAL CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND 106 REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2017-2018 107 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: 108 The amount hereinafter named aggregating Three Million Seven Hundred Thirty One Thousand Three Hundred dollars 109 ($3,731,300) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues and other 110 funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2017 111 and ending June 30, 2018: 112 REVENUES 113 2017/18 2017/18 114 BUDGET REVISED 115 BEGINNING BALANCE - PROJECTS $ 412,900 $ 1,637,200 116 REVENUES 117 STATE GRANTS - Other 33,000 63,000 118 INTEREST EARNINGS 8,300 8,300 119 TRANSFER FROM GENERAL FUND 1,368,700 1,368,700 120 TRANSFER FROM PARKLAND RESERVE 205,000 235,800 121 TRANSFER FROM CAPITAL ASSET RESERVE 418,300 418,300 122 SUBTOTAL PROJECT RECEIPTS 2,033,300 2,094,100 123 TOTAL FUNDING SOURCES 2,033,300 2,094,100 124 TOTAL BEGINNING BALANCE AND REVENUES $ 2,446,200 $ 3,731,300 125 EXPENSE SUMMARY 126 2017/18 2017/18 127 EXPENDITURES BUDGET REVISED 128 CITY CLERK $ - $ 156,200 129 FIRE 145,700 145,700 130 GROUNDS 62,500 62,500 131 RECREATION 271,000 331,800 132 POLICE 379,900 379,900 133 STREETS 1,070,000 1,977,000 134 SANITATION - 42,000 135 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 36,600 63,600 136 FACILITIES MANAGEMENT 25,100 25,100 137 DEPARTMENT SUBTOTAL 1,990,800 3,183,800 138 TRANSFERS 139 TRANSFER TO PARKLAND RESERVE - 25,800 140 TRANSFERS SUBTOTAL - 25,800 141 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 1,990,800 3,209,600 142 BUDGET BALANCE 455,400 521,700 143 TOTAL BUDGET BALANCE & EXPENDITURES $ 2,446,200 $ 3,731,300 144 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make 145 interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any 146 department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. 147 ADOPTED: 3

First Reading 148 2017-2018 BUDGET ORDINANCES 149 GOVERNMENTAL CAPITAL ASSET RESERVE 150 CASH RECEIPTS/REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2017-2018 151 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: 152 The amount hereinafter named aggregating One Million Eight Hundred Nine Thousand Three Hundred 153 dollars ($1,809,300) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current 154 revenues and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal 155 year beginning July 1, 2017 and ending June 30, 2018: 156 CASH RECEIPTS 157 2017/18 2017/18 158 BUDGET REVISED 159 BEGINNING BALANCE $ 1,525,700 $ 1,576,100 160 RECEIPTS 161 INTEREST EARNINGS 18,500 18,500 162 TRANSFER FROM GENERAL FUND - 214,700 163 TOTAL RECEIPTS 18,500 233,200 164 TOTALS $ 1,544,200 $ 1,809,300 165 EXPENSE SUMMARY 166 2017/18 2017/18 167 BUDGET REVISED 168 TRANSFER TO GOVERNMENTAL CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND $ 418,300 $ 418,300 169 CARRY FORWARD TO NEXT YEAR 1,125,900 1,391,000 170 TOTALS $ 1,544,200 $ 1,809,300 171 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make 172 interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any 173 department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. 174 ADOPTED: 4

First Reading 175 2017-2018 BUDGET ORDINANCES 176 PARKLAND/RECREATION RESERVE 177 CASH RECEIPTS/REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2017-2018 178 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: 179 The amount hereinafter named aggregating Three Hundred Forty One Thousand Two Hundred dollars 180 ($341,200) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues and 181 other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year 182 beginning July 1, 2017 and ending June 30, 2018: 183 OPERATING REVENUES 184 2017/18 2017/18 185 BUDGET REVISED 186 BEGINNING BALANCE $ 376,300 $ 336,300 187 INTEREST INCOME 4,900 4,900 188 TOTALS $ 381,200 $ 341,200 189 OPERATING EXPENSES 190 2017/18 2017/18 191 BUDGET REVISED 192 TRANSFER TO GOVERNMENTAL CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND $ 205,000 $ 235,800 193 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE 176,200 105,400 194 TOTALS $ 381,200 $ 341,200 195 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make 196 interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any 197 department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. 198 ADOPTED: 5

First Reading 199 2017-2018 BUDGET ORDINANCES 200 WATER/WASTEWATER FUND 201 REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2017-2018 202 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: 203 The amount hereinafter named aggregating Eighteen Million Five Hundred Nineteen Thousand Two Hundred 204 dollars ($18,519,200) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues 205 and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year 206 beginning July 1, 2017 and ending June 30, 2018: 207 2017/18 2017/18 208 BUDGET REVISED 209 BEGINNING BALANCE - WATER $ 1,330,900 $ 1,680,500 210 BEGINNING BALANCE - WASTEWATER 1,166,800 1,399,700 211 TOTAL BEGINNING BALANCES 2,497,700 3,080,200 212 BASE REVENUE 213 WATER SERVICES 5,914,600 5,914,600 214 WASTEWATER SERVICES 3,768,000 3,768,000 215 WASTEWATER TREATMENT SERVICES 2,952,900 2,952,900 216 GROUNDWATER INFLOW ADJUSTMENT 1,899,700 1,899,700 217 WATER TANK SPACE LEASING 391,400 391,400 218 WATER IMPACT FEES 231,000 231,000 219 WASTEWATER IMPACT FEES 209,000 209,000 220 INTEREST - WATER 5,700 5,700 221 INTEREST - WASTEWATER 5,700 5,700 222 MISCELLANEOUS SERVICE FEE 61,000 61,000 223 TOTAL REVENUES 15,439,000 15,439,000 224 TOTAL BEGINNING BALANCES AND REVENUES $ 17,936,700 $ 18,519,200 6

First Reading 225 2017-2018 BUDGET ORDINANCES - FIRST AMENDMENT 226 WATER/WASTEWATER FUND - EXPENSES AND BUDGET BALANCE FOR 2017-2018 227 2017/18 2017/18 228 DIRECT EXPENSES BUDGET REVISED 229 ENGINEERING & INSPECTION $ 517,800 $ 523,300 230 WATER DEPARTMENT 635,700 650,300 231 WASTEWATER DEPARTMENT 962,800 981,000 232 WATER TREATMENT PLANT 1,780,500 1,791,100 233 DIRECT EXPENDITURE SUBTOTAL 3,896,800 3,945,700 234 OTHER EXPENSES 235 DEBT SERVICE - WATER 524,600 524,600 236 DEBT SERVICE - WASTEWATER 612,800 612,800 237 RETIREES HEALTH CARE 242,200 242,200 238 OTHER EMPLOYMENT EXPENSES 25,900 4,000 239 PENSION UNFUNDED LIABILITY - 144,800 240 KENT COUNTY TREATMENT CHARGE 3,926,500 3,926,500 241 INTERFUND SERVICE FEES 1,716,100 1,716,100 242 BANK & CREDIT CARD FEES 26,000 26,000 243 BOND ISSUE COSTS 40,000 40,000 244 OTHER EXPENSES SUBTOTAL 7,114,100 7,237,000 245 TRANSFER TO: 246 GENERAL FUND FROM WATER 500,000 500,000 247 GENERAL FUND FROM WASTEWATER 400,000 400,000 248 WATER IMP AND EXT 1,600,000 1,586,500 249 WASTEWATER IMP AND EXT 1,600,000 1,586,500 250 GENERAL EMPLOYEES PENSION 7,500 7,500 251 TRANSFER TO SUBTOTAL 4,107,500 4,080,500 252 TOTAL EXPENSES 15,118,400 15,263,200 253 BUDGET BALANCES 254 BUDGET BALANCE WATER 1,575,600 1,849,400 255 BUDGET BALANCE WASTEWATER 1,242,700 1,406,800 256 BUDGET BALANCE SUBTOTALS 2,818,300 3,256,200 257 TOTAL CURRENT YEAR BALANCES AND EXPENSES $ 17,936,700 $ 18,519,400 258 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make 259 interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any 260 department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. 261 ADOPTED: 7

First Reading 262 2017-2018 BUDGET ORDINANCES 263 WATER/WASTEWATER IMPROVEMENT & EXTENSION FUND 264 CASH RECEIPTS/REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2017-2018 265 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: 266 The amount hereinafter named aggregating Nine Million One Hundred Forty Three Thousand Two Hundred 267 dollars ($9,143,200) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues 268 and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year 269 begining July 1, 2017 and ending June 30, 2018: 270 CASH RECEIPTS 271 2017/18 2017/18 272 BUDGET REVISED 273 BEGINNING BALANCE - WATER $ 2,042,000 $ 4,836,100 274 BEGINNING BALANCE - WASTEWATER 1,195,100 1,008,500 275 TOTAL BEGINNING BALANCES 3,237,100 5,844,600 276 REVENUES 277 MISC REVENUES - 32,400 278 TRANS FR OPERATING FUND - WATER 1,600,000 1,586,500 279 TRANS FR OPERATING FUND - WW 1,600,000 1,586,500 280 INTEREST INCOME 93,200 93,200 281 TOTAL REVENUES 3,293,200 3,298,600 282 TOTAL BEGINNING BALANCES & REVENUES $ 6,530,300 $ 9,143,200 283 EXPENSE SUMMARY 284 2017/18 2017/18 285 EXPENSES BUDGET REVISED 286 WATER $ 1,608,400 $ 1,742,000 287 WASTEWATER 1,543,000 2,569,500 288 WATER TREATMENT PLANT - 2,468,200 289 TOTAL EXPENSES 3,151,400 6,779,700 290 BUDGET BALANCE - WATER 2,080,200 2,275,200 291 BUDGET BALANCE - WASTEWATER 1,298,700 88,300 292 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE SUBTOTALS 3,378,900 2,363,500 293 TOTAL BUDGET BALANCES & EXPENSES $ 6,530,300 $ 9,143,200 294 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make 295 interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any 296 department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. 297 ADOPTED: 8

First Reading 298 2017-2018 BUDGET ORDINANCES 299 WATER/WASTEWATER IMPACT FEE RESERVE 300 CASH RECEIPTS/REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2017-2018 301 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: 302 The amount hereinafter named aggregating Four Million Two Hundred Thirty Nine Thousand Four Hundred 303 dollars ($4,239,400) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated fromcurrent revenues 304 and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year 305 beginning July 1, 2017 and ending June 30, 2018: 306 CASH RECEIPTS 307 2017/18 2017/18 308 BUDGET REVISED 309 BEGINNING BALANCE - WATER $ 249,800 $ 652,500 310 BEGINNING BALANCE - WASTEWATER 2,909,500 3,540,600 311 TOTAL BEGINNING BALANCES 3,159,300 4,193,100 312 RECEIPTS 313 INTEREST EARNINGS - WATER 4,200 4,200 314 INTEREST EARNINGS - WASTEWATER 42,100 42,100 315 TOTAL RECEIPTS 46,300 46,300 316 TOTALS $ 3,205,600 $ 4,239,400 317 EXPENSE SUMMARY 318 2017/18 2017/18 319 BUDGET REVISED 320 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE - WATER $ 254,000 $ 656,700 321 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE - WASTEWATER 2,951,600 3,582,700 322 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE SUBTOTALS 3,205,600 4,239,400 323 TOTALS $ 3,205,600 $ 4,239,400 324 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make 325 interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any 326 department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. 327 ADOPTED: 9

First Reading 328 2017-2018 BUDGET ORDINANCES 329 WATER/WASTEWATER CONTINGENCY RESERVE 330 CASH RECEIPTS/REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2017-2018 331 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: 332 The amount hereinafter named aggregating Five Hundred Thirty Seven Thousand Six Hundred dollars 333 ($537,600) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues 334 and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year 335 beginning July 1, 2017 and ending June 30, 2018: 336 CASH RECEIPTS 337 2017/18 2017/18 338 BUDGET REVISED 339 BEGINNING BALANCE - WATER $ 251,600 $ 251,700 340 BEGINNING BALANCE - WASTEWATER 278,200 278,300 341 TOTAL BEGINNING BALANCES 529,800 530,000 342 RECEIPTS 343 INTEREST EARNINGS - WATER 3,500 3,500 344 INTEREST EARNINGS - WASTEWATER 4,100 4,100 345 TOTAL RECEIPTS 7,600 7,600 346 TOTALS $ 537,400 $ 537,600 347 BUDGET SUMMARY 348 2017/18 2017/18 349 BUDGET REVISED 350 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE - WATER $ 255,100 $ 255,200 351 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE - WASTEWATER 282,300 282,400 352 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE SUBTOTALS 537,400 537,600 353 TOTAL EXPENSES AND CURRENT YEAR BALANCES $ 537,400 $ 537,600 354 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make 355 interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any 356 department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. 357 ADOPTED: 10

First Reading 358 2017-2018 BUDGET ORDINANCES 359 ELECTRIC REVENUE FUND 360 REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2017-2018 361 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: 362 The amount hereinafter named aggregating Ninety Seven Million Nine Hundred Fifty Thousand dollars 363 ($97,950,000) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues and other 364 funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2017 365 and ending June 30, 2018: 366 2017/18 2017/18 367 BUDGET REVISED 368 BEGINNING BALANCE $ 20,290,200 $ 22,252,500 369 DISTRIBUTION OF EARNINGS - PCA CREDIT (6,176,700) (6,176,700) 370 BEGINNING BALANCE - ADJUSTED 14,113,500 16,075,800 371 BASE REVENUE 372 DIRECT SALES TO CUSTOMER 79,656,000 79,656,000 373 UTILITY TAX 1,236,200 1,236,200 374 MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE 531,200 531,200 375 RENT REVENUE 104,500 104,500 376 GREEN ENERGY 130,000 130,000 377 INTEREST EARNINGS 216,300 216,300 378 TOTAL REVENUES 81,874,200 81,874,200 379 TOTAL BEGINNING BALANCE & REVENUES $ 95,987,700 $ 97,950,000 11

First Reading 380 2017-2018 BUDGET ORDINANCES - FIRST AMENDMENT 381 ELECTRIC REVENUE FUND EXPENSES AND BUDGET BALANCE FOR 2017-2018 382 2017/18 2017/18 383 EXPENSES BUDGET REVISED 384 POWER SUPPLY $ 22,807,900 $ 22,557,900 385 SOLAR ENERGY 2,661,300 2,661,300 386 SOLAR RENEWAL ENERGY CREDITS 371,200 371,200 387 POWER SUPPLY MANAGEMENT 835,000 835,000 388 REC'S (Renewable Energy Credits) 578,300 578,300 389 RGGI (Regional Greenhouse Gas Init.) 64,000 64,000 390 PJM CHARGES - ENERGY 6,024,400 6,024,400 391 PJM CHARGES - TRANSMISSION & FEES 6,900,200 6,900,200 392 CAPACITY CHARGES 10,482,500 10,482,500 393 SUB-TOTAL POWER SUPPLY 50,724,800 50,474,800 394 PLANT OPERATIONS 6,146,500 6,146,500 395 GENERATIONS FUELS 817,400 817,400 396 PJM SPOT MARKET ENERGY (958,100) (958,100) 397 PJM CREDITS (535,400) (535,400) 398 CAPACITY CREDITS (7,120,100) (7,120,100) 399 GENERATION SUBTOTAL (1,649,700) (1,649,700) 400 POWER SUPPLY & GENERATION SUBTOTAL 49,075,100 48,825,100 401 DIRECT EXPENDITURES 402 TRANSMISSION/DISTRIBUTION 3,599,600 3,609,700 403 ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING 1,226,400 1,247,900 404 ADMINISTRATION 797,000 777,000 405 METER READING 392,500 393,500 406 SYSTEMS OPERATIONS 644,700 656,700 407 DIRECT EXPENDITURE SUBTOTALS 6,660,200 6,684,800 408 OTHER EXPENSES: 409 UTILITY TAX 1,236,200 1,236,200 410 ALLOW FOR UNCOLLECTIBLES 250,000 250,000 411 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES - RFP'S 100,000 250,000 412 LEGAL EXPENSES 25,000 125,000 413 RETIREES HEALTH CARE 820,300 820,300 414 OTHER EMPLOYMENT EXPENSES 105,200 80,600 415 PENSION UNFUNDED LIABILITY 1,000,000 1,234,500 416 OPEB UNFUNDED LIABILITY 1,000,000 1,000,000 417 GREEN ENERGY PAYMENT TO DEMEC 130,000 130,000 418 INTERFUND SERVICE FEES 3,660,100 3,660,100 419 INTEREST ON DEPOSITS 21,000 21,000 420 BANK & CREDIT CARD FEES 295,000 295,000 421 DEBT SERVICE 1,605,500 1,605,500 422 OTHER EXPENSES SUBTOTAL 10,248,300 10,708,200 423 TRANSFER TO: 424 IMPROVEMENT & EXTENSION 5,000,000 5,000,000 425 GENERAL FUND 10,000,000 10,000,000 426 RATE STABILIZATION RESERVE 5,200,000 5,200,000 427 TRANSFER TO SUBTOTAL 20,200,000 20,200,000 428 TOTAL EXPENSES 86,183,600 86,418,100 429 BUDGET BALANCE - WORKING CAPITAL 9,804,100 11,531,900 430 TOTALS $ 95,987,700 $ 97,950,000 431 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make 432 interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any 433 department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. 434 ADOPTED: 12

First Reading 435 2017-2018 BUDGET ORDINANCES 436 ELECTRIC UTILITY IMPROVEMENT AND EXTENSION FUND 437 CASH RECEIPTS/REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2017-2018 438 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: 439 The amount hereinafter named aggregating Fifteen Million Eight Hundred Forty Five Thousand Five Hundred 440 dollars ($15,845,500) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues 441 and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year 442 beginning July 1, 2017 and ending June 30, 2018: 443 REVENUES 444 2017/18 2017/18 445 BUDGET REVISED 446 BEGINNING BALANCE $ 6,600,300 $ 10,365,700 447 REVENUES 448 TRANSFER FROM ELECTRIC 5,000,000 5,000,000 449 GENERAL SERVICE BILLING 370,000 370,000 450 INTEREST EARNINGS 109,800 109,800 451 TOTAL REVENUES 5,479,800 5,479,800 452 TOTALS $ 12,080,100 $ 15,845,500 453 EXPENSE SUMMARY 454 2017/18 2017/18 455 EXPENSES BUDGET REVISED 456 ELECTRIC ADMINISTRATION $ 8,500 $ 8,500 457 ELECTRIC GENERATION 2,328,000 2,816,600 458 TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION 1,725,500 1,725,500 459 ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING 1,315,000 1,485,100 460 ELECTRIC METERING - 36,000 461 ERP SYSTEM 1,500,000 2,441,700 462 TOTAL EXPENSES 6,877,000 8,513,400 463 BUDGET BALANCE 5,203,100 7,332,100 464 TOTAL BUDGET BALANCE & EXPENSES $ 12,080,100 $ 15,845,500 465 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make 466 interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any 467 department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. 468 ADOPTED: 13

First Reading 469 2017-2018 BUDGET ORDINANCES 470 ELECTRIC UTILITY CONTINGENCY RESERVE 471 CASH RECEIPTS/REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2017-2018 472 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: 473 The amount hereinafter named aggregating Eight Hundred Seventy Six Thousand Three Hundred dollars 474 ($876,300) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues and 475 other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year 476 beginning July 1, 2017 and ending June 30, 2018: 477 CASH RECEIPTS 478 2017/18 2017/18 479 BUDGET REVISED 480 BEGINNING BALANCE $ 863,500 $ 862,500 481 RECEIPTS 482 INTEREST EARNINGS 13,800 13,800 483 TOTAL RECEIPTS 13,800 13,800 484 TOTALS $ 877,300 $ 876,300 485 EXPENSE SUMMARY 486 2017/18 2017/18 487 BUDGET REVISED 488 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE $ 877,300 $ 879,300 489 TOTALS $ 877,300 $ 876,300 490 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make 491 interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any 492 department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. 493 ADOPTED: 14

First Reading 494 2017-2018 BUDGET ORDINANCES 495 ELECTRIC UTILITY DEPRECIATION RESERVE 496 SOURCES AND USE OF FUNDS FOR 2017-2018 497 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: 498 The amount hereinafter named aggregating Thirteen Million Two Hundred Forty Seven Thousand 499 dollars ($13,247,000) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from 500 current revenues and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government 501 for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2017 and ending June 30, 2018: 502 CASH RECEIPTS 503 2017/18 2017/18 504 BUDGET REVISED 505 BEGINNING BALANCE $ 13,042,800 $ 13,038,300 506 INTEREST EARNINGS 208,700 208,700 507 TOTALS $ 13,251,500 $ 13,247,000 508 BUDGET SUMMARY 509 2017/18 2017/18 510 BUDGET REVISED 511 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE $ 13,251,500 $ 13,247,000 512 TOTALS $ 13,251,500 $ 13,247,000 513 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make 514 interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any 515 department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. 516 ADOPTED: 15

First Reading 517 2017-2018 BUDGET ORDINANCES 518 ELECTRIC UTILITY FUTURE CAPACITY RESERVE 519 SOURCES AND USE OF FUNDS FOR 2017-2018 520 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: 521 The amount hereinafter named aggregating Thirteen Million Four Hundred Four Thousand Four Hundred 522 dollars ($13,404,400) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues 523 and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year 524 beginning July 1, 2017 and ending June 30, 2018: 525 CASH RECEIPTS 526 2017/18 2017/18 527 BUDGET REVISED 528 BEGINNING BALANCE $ 13,197,700 $ 13,193,200 529 INTEREST EARNINGS 211,200 211,200 530 TOTALS $ 13,408,900 $ 13,404,400 531 BUDGET SUMMARY 532 2017/18 2017/18 533 BUDGET REVISED 534 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE $ 13,408,900 $ 13,404,400 535 TOTALS $ 13,408,900 $ 13,404,400 536 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make 537 interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any 538 department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. 539 ADOPTED: 16

First Reading 540 2017-2018 BUDGET ORDINANCES 541 ELECTRIC UTILITY INSURANCE STABLIZATION RESERVE 542 SOURCES AND USE OF FUNDS FOR 2017-2018 543 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: 544 The amount hereinafter named aggregating Seven Hundred Eighty Seven Thousand One Hundred 545 dollars ($787,100) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues 546 and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year 547 beginning July 1, 2017 and ending June 30, 2018: 548 CASH RECEIPTS 549 2017/18 2017/18 550 BUDGET REVISED 551 BEGINNING BALANCE $ 775,800 $ 774,700 552 INTEREST EARNINGS 12,400 12,400 553 TOTALS $ 788,200 $ 787,100 554 BUDGET SUMMARY 555 2017/18 2017/18 556 BUDGET REVISED 557 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE $ 788,200 $ 787,100 558 TOTALS $ 788,200 $ 787,100 559 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make 560 interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any 561 department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. 562 ADOPTED: 17

First Reading 563 2017-2018 BUDGET ORDINANCES 564 ELECTRIC UTILITY RATE STABLIZATION RESERVE 565 SOURCES AND USE OF FUNDS FOR 2017-2018 566 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: 567 The amount hereinafter named aggregating Sixteen Million Seven Thousand Six Hundred dollars 568 ($16,007,600) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current 569 revenues and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government 570 for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2017 and ending June 30, 2018: 571 CASH RECEIPTS 572 2017/18 2017/18 573 BUDGET REVISED 574 BEGINNING BALANCE $ 10,635,500 $ 10,637,400 575 INTEREST EARNINGS 170,200 170,200 576 TRANSFER FROM ELECTRIC OPERATING FUND 5,200,000 5,200,000 577 TOTALS $ 16,005,700 $ 16,007,600 578 BUDGET SUMMARY 579 2017/18 2017/18 580 BUDGET REVISED 581 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE $ 16,005,700 $ 16,007,600 582 TOTALS $ 16,005,700 $ 16,007,600 583 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make 584 interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any 585 department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. 586 ADOPTED: 18

First Reading 587 2017-2018 BUDGET ORDINANCES 588 WORKERS COMPENSATION FUND 589 CASH RECEIPTS/REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2017-2018 590 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: 591 The amount hereinafter named aggregating Two Million One Hundred Eighty Four Thousand Five Hundred 592 dollars ($2,184,500) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current 593 revenues and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the 594 fiscal year beginning July 1, 2017 and ending June 30, 2018: 595 OPERATING REVENUES 596 2017/18 2017/18 597 BUDGET REVISED 598 BEGINNING BALANCE $ 1,487,800 $ 1,257,700 599 INTEREST INCOME 22,500 22,500 600 PREMIUM FROM CITY 904,300 904,300 601 TOTALS $ 2,414,600 $ 2,184,500 602 OPERATING EXPENSES 603 2017/18 2017/18 604 BUDGET REVISED 605 PROGRAM EXPENSES/SUPPLIES - CLAIMS $ 565,000 $ 565,000 606 INSURANCE 110,800 110,800 607 STATE OF DEL - SELF INSURANCE TAX 39,000 39,000 608 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 25,000 25,000 609 TOTAL EXPENSES 739,800 739,800 610 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE 1,674,800 1,444,700 611 TOTALS $ 2,414,600 $ 2,184,500 612 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make 613 interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any 614 department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. 615 ADOPTED: 19

First Reading 616 2017-2018 BUDGET ORDINANCES 617 COMMUNITY TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT FUND 618 CASH RECEIPTS/REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2017-2018 619 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: 620 The amount hereinafter named aggregating Five Hundred Seventy Thousand Nine Hundred dollars 621 ($570,900) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues and 622 other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year 623 beginning July 1, 2017 and ending June 30, 2018: 624 OPERATING REVENUES 625 2017/18 2017/18 626 BUDGET REVISED 627 PRIOR YEAR BALANCE $ 85,200 $ 70,900 628 GRANTS REVENUE 500,000 500,000 629 TOTALS $ 585,200 $ 570,900 630 OPERATING EXPENSES 631 2017/18 2017/18 632 BUDGET REVISED 633 PROGRAM EXP. GRANT RELATED $ 500,000 $ 500,000 634 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE 85,200 70,900 635 TOTALS $ 585,200 $ 570,900 636 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make 637 interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any 638 department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. 639 ADOPTED: 20

First Reading 640 2017-2018 BUDGET ORDINANCES 641 LIBRARY GRANT FUND 642 CASH RECEIPTS/REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2017-2018 643 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: 644 The amount hereinafter named aggregating Three Hundred One Thousand Five Hundred dollars 645 ($301,500) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues 646 and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year 647 beginning July 1, 2017 and ending June 30, 2018: 648 OPERATING REVENUES 649 2017/18 2017/18 650 BUDGET REVISED 651 PRIOR YEAR BALANCE $ - $ 18,900 652 STATE GRANT 281,700 280,800 653 FEDERAL GRANT 2,500 1,800 654 TOTALS $ 284,200 $ 301,500 655 OPERATING EXPENSES 656 2017/18 2017/18 657 BUDGET REVISED 658 STATE GRANTS 659 FURNITURE/FIXTURES $ 1,500 $ 5,500 660 OFFICE SUPPLIES 30,000 28,000 661 PRINTING AND DUPLICATING 13,000 13,700 662 PROGRAM EXPENSES/SUPPLIES 23,500 25,500 663 BOOKS 126,400 128,800 664 COMPUTER SOFTWARE 2,100 2,500 665 COMPUTER HARDWARE 1,000 5,300 666 AUDIO VISUAL SUPPLIES 74,700 79,000 667 POSTAGE 100 200 668 TRAINING/CONF/FOOD/TRAV 2,500 4,200 669 OFF EQP/REPAIRS & MAINT 4,900 4,000 670 OTHER EQUIP - LEASE 2,000 2,100 671 SUBTOTAL EXPENSES STATE GRANTS 281,700 298,800 672 FEDERAL GRANTS 673 PROGRAM EXPENSES/SUPPLIES 2,500 2,700 674 SUBTOTAL EXPENSES FEDERAL GRANTS 2,500 2,700 675 GRAND TOTAL EXPENSES 284,200 301,500 676 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE - - 677 TOTALS $ 284,200 $ 301,500 678 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make 679 interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any 680 department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. 681 ADOPTED: 21

First Reading 682 2017-2018 BUDGET ORDINANCES 683 POLICE GRANTS FUND 684 CASH RECEIPTS/REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2017-2018 685 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: 686 The amount hereinafter named aggregating Seven Hundred Ninety Three Thousand Five hundred dollars 687 ($793,500) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues 688 and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year 689 beginning July 1, 2017 and ending June 30, 2018: 690 OPERATING REVENUES 691 2017/18 2017/18 692 BUDGET REVISED 693 PRIOR YEAR BALANCE $ 72,400 $ 121,600 694 STATE AND FEDERAL GRANTS RECEIVED 358,000 671,900 695 TOTALS $ 430,400 $ 793,500 696 OPERATING EXPENSES 697 2017/18 2017/18 698 BUDGET REVISED 699 EXPENDITURES 700 PERSONNEL EXPENDITURES 701 CADET PROGRAM SALARIES $ 11,900 $ 11,900 702 CADET PROGRAM FICA 900 900 703 CADET PROGRAM W/COMP 700 700 704 MATERIALS AND SUPPLIES 705 POLICE EQUIPT & PROG SUPP 312,000 365,900 706 ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENDITURES 707 CELL PHONE CHARGES 20,000 20,000 708 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES - 210,000 709 TRAINING 15,000 25,000 710 AUDIT FEES 1,000 1,000 711 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 361,500 635,400 712 OTHER FINANCING USES 713 OPERATING TRANSFERS-OUT 60,000 100,000 714 TOTAL FINANCING USES 60,000 100,000 715 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE 8,900 58,100 716 TOTALS $ 430,400 $ 793,500 717 The above budget represents the combination of all State & Federal Grants. 718 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make 719 interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any 720 department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. 721 ADOPTED: 22

First Reading 722 2017-2018 BUDGET ORDINANCES 723 CDBG GRANT FUND 724 CASH RECEIPTS/REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2017-2018 725 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: 726 The amount hereinafter named aggregating Three Hundred Twenty Thousand Eight Hundred dollars 727 ($320,800) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues 728 and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year 729 beginning July 1, 2017 and ending June 30, 2018: 730 OPERATING REVENUES 731 2017/18 2017/18 732 BUDGET REVISED 733 PRIOR YEAR BALANCE $ 2,100 $ 2,100 734 CDBG GRANTS RECEIVED 216,700 318,700 735 TOTALS $ 218,800 $ 320,800 736 OPERATING EXPENSES 737 2017/18 2017/18 738 BUDGET REVISED 739 EXPENDITURES 740 PRIOR YEAR CONNECTION SUPP PROGRAM $ - $ 6,800 741 PRIOR YEAR CLOSING COST/DOWN PAYMENT PROGRAM - 11,800 742 PRIOR YEAR MHDC HOMEOWNER REHAB. - 35,900 743 PRIOR YEAR MHDC EMERGENCY HOME REPAIR - 15,000 744 PRIOR YEAR ADMIN EXPENSE - 18,800 745 CURRENT YEAR CLOSING COST/DOWN PAYMENT PROGRAM 60,000 70,000 746 CURRENT YEAR CONNECTION SUPP PROGRAM 3,000 3,000 747 CURRENT YEAR DOVER INTERFAITH MINISTRY 24,000 24,000 748 CURRENT YEAR MHDC EMERGENCY HOME REPAIR 25,000 26,000 749 CURRENT YEAR HABITAT FOR HUMANITY 21,300 21,300 750 CURRENT YEAR MHDC HOMEOWNER REHAB. 40,000 40,000 751 CURRENT YEAR ADMIN EXPENSE 43,400 46,100 752 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 216,700 318,700 753 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE 2,100 2,100 754 TOTALS $ 218,800 $ 320,800 755 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make 756 interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any 757 department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. 758 ADOPTED: 23

First Reading 759 2017-2018 BUDGET ORDINANCES 760 SUBSTANCE ABUSE GRANTS FUND 761 CASH RECEIPTS/REVENUES AND BUDGET FOR 2017-2018 762 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: 763 The amount hereinafter named aggregating One Hundred Forty Eight Thousand Four Hundred dollars 764 ($148,400) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues 765 and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year 766 beginning July 1, 2017 and ending June 30, 2018: 767 OPERATING REVENUES 768 2017/18 2017/18 769 BUDGET REVISED 770 PRIOR YEAR BALANCE $ 45,300 $ 87,400 771 STATE GRANTS RECEIVED 28,000 28,000 772 RECREATION REVENUE 33,000 33,000 773 TOTALS $ 106,300 $ 148,400 774 OPERATING EXPENSES 775 2017/18 2017/18 776 BUDGET REVISED 777 EXPENDITURES 778 TEMPORARY HELP/BENEFITS $ 67,700 $ 67,700 779 PROGRAM EXPENSES/SUPPLIES 35,000 35,000 780 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 102,700 102,700 781 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE 3,600 45,700 782 TOTALS $ 106,300 $ 148,400 783 The above budget represents the combination of all State & Federal Grants. 784 The City Manager is hereby authorized, without further approval of the City Council, to make 785 interdepartmental transfers of up to five percent of the amount hereinafter appropriated to any 786 department with the exception of any transfers prohibited by City Procedure #F306. 787 ADOPTED: 24