Pwosè vèbal

REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING The Regular Council Meeting was held on December 10, 2012 at 7:30 p.m. with Council President Leary presiding. Council members present were Mr. Anderson, Mr. Lynn, Mr. Perza, Mr. Bonar, Mr. Hare, and Mr. Hutchison. Mrs. Williams was absent. Council staff members present were Police Chief Hosfelt, Mrs. Mitchell, Mr. Koenig, Mrs. Townshend, City Solicitor Rodriguez, and Mrs. McDowell. Mayor Carey was also present. OPEN FORUM The Open Forum was held at 7:15 p.m., prior to commencement of the Official Council Meeting. Council President Leary declared the Open Forum in session and reminded those present that Council was not in official session and could not take formal action. There was no one present wishing to speak during the Open Forum. The invocation was given by Councilman Perza, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. AGENDA ADDITIONS/DELETIONS Mr. Bonar moved for approval of the agenda as presented, seconded by Mr. Hutchison and unanimously carried. Mr. Bonar moved for approval of the consent agenda as presented, seconded by Mr. Hutchison and carried by a unanimous roll call vote. ADOPTION OF MINUTES - REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 26, 2012 The Minutes of the Regular Council Meeting of November 26, 2012 were unanimously approved by motion of Mr. Bonar, seconded by Mr. Hutchison and bore the written approval of Mayor Carey. ELECTION RESULTS - 2012 SPECIAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION Mrs. Traci McDowell, City Clerk, reported the results of the 2012 Special Municipal Election held on November 27, 2012, as certified by the Election Board, are as follows: FOURTH DISTRICT COUNCIL Wallace R. Dixon 85 Bernhard A. Greenfield 23 Total District Votes Cast 108 Total Registered Voters 4,028 Mr. Bonar moved for approval of the Election Results as reported by the City Clerk. The motion was seconded by Mr. Hare and unanimously carried.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 10, 2012 PAGE 2 OATH OF OFFICE - COUNCIL - FOURTH DISTRICT - WALLACE R. DIXON The Honorable Henry DuPont Ridgely, Justice of the Delaware Supreme Court, administered the Oath of Office as follows: Council - Fourth District (Term to expire May 2015) - Wallace R. Dixon RECESS FOR PHOTOGRAPHS (MAYOR AND COUNCIL) Mr. Bonar moved to recess to take photographs of the Mayor and members of City Council, seconded by Mr. Lynn and unanimously carried. Meeting recessed at 7:36 p.m. Noting the absence of Councilwoman Williams, by unanimous consent, Council deferred taking photographs of the Mayor and Council. By unanimous consent, the meeting was reconvened. Meeting reconvened at 7:39 p.m. with Council President Leary presiding. Council members present were Mr. Anderson, Mr. Dixon, Mr. Lynn, Mr. Perza, Mr. Bonar, Mr. Hare, and Mr. Hutchison. Mrs. Williams was absent. CERTIFICATE OF APPRECIATION - CITY ELECTRIC WORKERS WHO ASSISTED IN NEW JERSEY HURRICANE RECOVERY The following Certificate of Appreciation was read into the record by the City Clerk: WHEREAS, the City of Dover is fortunate to have Electric Department Line Crew members who work diligently to maintain electricity through adverse circumstances and weather conditions; and WHEREAS, on November 3, 2012, the City of Dover was requested to aid in power restoration to the communities of Madison and Harding Township, New Jersey, due to widespread power outages resulting from the effects of Hurricane Sandy; and WHEREAS, on November 4, 2012, five members of the City's Line Crew were dispatched to New Jersey and three additional members joined them on November 8, 2012; and WHEREAS, these individuals demonstrated their dedication by going above and beyond the necessary day-to-day actions by stepping forward to serve those in need outside of our community; and WHEREAS, we are extremely proud of their efforts and thankful for their willingness to share their skills during this time of great hardship for our neighbors to the north. NOW, THEREFORE, it is deemed an honor and privilege, on this 10th day of December 2012, to present this Certificate of Appreciation to the City of Dover Electric Line Crews for their efforts in restoring power to other communities. With Sincere Appreciation from the Mayor and Council

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 10, 2012 PAGE 3 PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER RENAMING COURT STREET, DUKE OF YORK STREET, AND WILLIAM PENN STREET AS MARTIN LUTHER KING STREET; RENAMING CAPITAL DRIVE AS COURT STREET (RETAINING THE COURT STREET ALLEY NAME); THE PLACEMENT OF PLAQUES OF DEDICATION TO WILLIAM PENN AND THE DUKE OF YORK; RENAMING THE DOVER PUBLIC LIBRARY IN HONOR OF DR. MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR. During their Regular Meeting of November 26, 2012, City Council approved the Legislative, Finance, and Administration Committee’s recommendation to set a public hearing at this time and place to consider a proposal to rename Court, Duke of York, and William Penn Streets as Martin Luther King Street, to rename Capital Drive as Court Street, and for the alley currently named Court Street to remain Court Street, and to consider the placement of plaques of dedication to William Penn and the Duke of York on the respective streets and the proposed renaming of the Dover Public Library in honor of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Members were reminded that the initial proposal was to rename the entirety of the Division Street (Route 8) corridor, which crosses west to east through the City of Dover (City limit to City limit), as Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard. Staff noted that the proposal was being brought forward by City Council through the Legislative, Finance and Administration Committee and was not following the procedure specified in Dover Code of Ordinances, Chapter 98, Article II, Section 98-45 Street Name Change Procedure, which begins with a petition from property owners. Mrs. Ann Marie Townshend, Director of Planning and Community Development, reviewed the Staff Review Report and Development Advisory Committee Comments. The new street name proposed is Martin Luther King Jr. Street. As part of the renaming proposal, the internal drive aisle within the Courtside Apartment complex would be named Court Street. Also, the alley street segment on the south side of the current Court Street located between River Road and Cowgill Street would retain the name of Court Street. Members were provided a map of the proposed corridor. Mrs. Townshend advised members that the DAC has offered recommendations regarding the proposal, as follows: 1. Staff recommended that if the street name change is approved by City Council that an effective date of February 1, 2013 be set. This will give the affected agencies time to make the necessary operational changes and for notification of property owners. 2. Staff recommended the use of the street term “Boulevard” rather than “Street.” Resulting in a street name as Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard. 3. If the one way segments of Duke of York Street and William Penn Street are also selected for the street name change, then Staff recommended that the use of the post direction identifier of North and South should be utilized. Resulting in street names of Martin Luther King Jr. Street (Boulevard) North and Martin Luther King Jr. Street (Boulevard) South.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 10, 2012 PAGE 4 4. Staff recommended the use of the post direction identifier of North and South for the areas to remain named as Court Street: Court Street North for the internal drive aisle within the Garden Court Apartments and Court Street South for the street segment south of the existing Court Street where the single family houses exist. 5. As part of the Development Advisory Committee process, a series of City, County, and State agencies were notified of the street name change request. Any comments received regarding the request were attached to the report. 6. Upon approval of the street name change, notification of appropriate City, County, and State agencies will be completed by the City of Dover. 7. Upon approval of the street name change, a public outreach effort (in various media) is recommended to alert residents, customers, visitors, etc. of the change and its implementation. A key contact point should be established for questions. 8. Upon approval of the street name change, the installation of updated street name blades and other associated street signage will need to be completed by the City of Dover. 9. Upon approval of the street names and assignment of street numbers (if necessary), it is the responsibility of the individual property owner to bear the cost of and take action to repost address number and update appropriate mailing address on documents. 10. In this area of the City, there are a number of Information Map Kiosks located throughout the Legislative Mall area, at the Johnson Victrola Museum, and within public parking lots i.e. Bradford Street Lot that will need to be updated with the street name changes. These maps were funded and installed by various state agencies and non-profit groups. 11. The motion of November 13, 2012 by the Legislative, Finance and Administration Committee also included other recommendations for the placement of plaques of dedication for William Penn and Duke of York and a proposal for the renaming of the Dover Public Library in honor of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. This report does not provide a review of these proposals. a. Staff noted that the Delaware Public Archives manages the Delaware Historical Markers program where markers are placed at historically significant locations statewide.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 10, 2012 PAGE 5 Responding to Mr. Anderson, Mrs. Townshend confirmed that if Council approved the proposal as is and did not include properties located on South or North Court Street, there would be no residential properties affected by the proposed change. Council President Leary declared the public hearing open. Mr. Jim Stewart, 742 Bicentennial Boulevard, indicated his support for the street name changes. He noted that the media had mentioned the new Library in their report of this proposal and since the Library Capital Campaign remains underway, he requested that the naming of the Library not be included in this matter since it could affect fund raising efforts. Mr. Bruce Haas, 53 N. Halsey Road, explained his partial opposition to the street name changes, noting no objections to the renaming of that portion of Court Street from the bridge to Route 13. He stated his opposition was with the renaming of William Penn and Duke of York Streets. He reminded members that if it wasn't for the Duke of York, residents would be speaking Dutch and be answering to New York or Amsterdam, and if it wasn’t for William Penn, Delaware’s capital would be Harrisburg and that when William Penn was granted lands from Pennsylvania and later Delaware, he established laws. He felt that any change in these street names would be disrespectful to these individuals (the Duke of York and William Penn). Mrs. Ann Stewart, 742 Bicentennial Boulevard, stated that although she supported the renaming of the streets, she requested that the naming of the Library not be considered in conjunction with this proposal. Mr. Bernhard Greenfield, 901 Wilson Drive, noted that Martin Luther King, Jr. accomplished so much more for not only his people but for the entire country and he felt that he deserved to be given recognition. He suggested that rather than changing street names to honor Martin Luther King, Jr., that the City name the new Library as the Martin Luther King, Jr. Dover Public Library, which would cost substantially less than the remaining of streets. Mr. Robert Bresnahan, 14 Muirfield Court, advised members that as a member of the Friends of the Library, he supported the current name of the Dover Public Library. He expressed pride in the Dover community, City Council, and State legislators, particularly Senator Brian Bushweller, for the manner in which the proposal had been handled, which he felt had demonstrated the concept of a democratic society. He reviewed the process involved with the consideration of the proposal and felt that it had been a wonderful example of citizens and government leadership in this community sharing a desired goal and then finding a solution acceptable to all parties involved. He congratulated all who participated and have been involved in this democratic process. Mrs. Beverly Bresnahan, 14 Muirfield Court, stated that she was addressing members both as the Secretary to the Friends of the Library and as a resident. Although she did not support the renaming of the Dover Public Library, she did support the proposal to rename Court Street in honor of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. She reminded members that many individuals in the community had made donations to support the construction of the new Library. In addition, she stated that she was speaking on behalf of Barbara Qaissaunee, another Board Member of the Friends of the Library who

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 10, 2012 PAGE 6 was not able to attend the meeting, and that Ms. Qaissaunee's family held a fund raiser and family and friends contributed enough to have a room in the Dover Library named for her husband, Dr. Abdul Qaissaunee. She stated that another Friend of the Library, June Honeycutt, also wished to be quoted, stating: “Those of us who got behind the Friends of the Library and their efforts to urge the public to make donations to the new Library, made those donations to a Library that was and should continue to be named the Dover Public Library.” Mrs. Bresnahan advised members that she, along with her husband, were proud to sponsor a reading nook in the new Library in honor of her mother, Lorraine Napier, who taught her the love of reading and libraries. She reminded members that all raising of money for the new Library was done in the name of the Dover Public Library and felt that was what it should continue to be named. Mr. William Daisey, 215 Pine Street, relayed his support for the renaming of Court Street and felt that it should include the entire area suggested, including William Penn and Duke of York Streets. It was his feeling that if asked who William Penn or the Duke of York were, the residents of Dover would not know. He advised members that most State capitals have a street named in honor of Dr. King; however, Dover is one of the few that did not and, being the capital of the First State, Dover should not be the last to have a street named for Dr. King. He stated that most people do not fully realize what Dr. King accomplished, explaining that he supported all people and not just minorities. Mr. Daisey stated his involvement in the 1960s March on Washington with Dr. King and recalled the anger over discrimination/segregation. Without the peaceful alternative offered by Dr. King, he stated that there would have been a civil war. As a result, he stated that Dr. King prevented a civil war which would have destroyed the United States, recalling that Russia was a powerful force and would have taken over at that time. Referring to the previous comments of Delawareans speaking Dutch, it was his opinion that if there was a civil war at that time, all citizens of the United States would be speaking Russian. Considering all that Dr. King had done for all peoples, Mr. Daisey felt that Dr. King was deserving of having a prominent street named in his honor and urged members to support the proposal. Mr. Fred Tolbert, 35 Karen Place, stated that although the capital of the First State had been extremely tardy with respect to honoring Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., and there were some who opposed the proposal to rename Division Street in his honor, remarks made in opposition to this location were due to various inconveniences and costs associated with such a change. He felt it should be noted that the State of Delaware and particularly the capital city, Dover, has a history of negative attitudes toward sensitive social issues. Mr. Tolbert stated that the opposition to the original proposal by the Legislative, Finance, and Administration (LF&A) Committee was thought by many to be expected and highly questionable. He reminded members that his remarks during the Committee’s hearing on September 10, 2012, were as follows: “The renaming of a portion of Division Street to honor the name of Reverend Martin Luther King is a very small way to honor such an internationally known hero and civil rights leader. In reality, it would be significantly more appropriate to name the new Dover library after Martin Luther King and/or to erect a memorial to him in a prominent place such as: 1) the front of the new library, 2) on Loockerman Street on the islands in front of City Hall, or 3) on The Green. These suggestions are offered not as an alternative to renaming Division Street but in addition to renaming Division Street.” Mr. Tolbert felt that the LF&A Committee demonstrated the much needed strength and willingness to begin to bring the City of Dover into the mainstream thinking of America today. He also felt that the recent national

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 10, 2012 PAGE 7 election was a strong indication of the changes taking place in this country. In his opinion, the revised proposal to honor Dr. King was an acceptable alternative plan to honor America’s contemporary hero and was made even more meaningful by not only renaming Court Street, Duke of York, and William Penn Streets as Martin Luther King Street (or Boulevard) but also proposing to rename the Dover Public Library in his honor. After reviewing the proposal, he strongly encouraged approval of the proposal as presented. Ms. Annie L. Scott, 216 Saxondale Lane, referred to a letter presented by N.C. Vasuki, President of the Friends of the Dover Library, and stated that she serves as the Vice-President and is in total agreement with the comments previously made by Jim and Ann Stewart and Mr. and Mrs. Bresnahan. To avoid the appearance of obfuscating or confusing the original request to rename a Dover City street to honor Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., she felt that it would be prudent for the City to investigate the procedures used by other cities that wish to honor individuals by naming streets in their honor. She encouraged City Council to develop a carefully crafted procedure for renaming streets. Ms. Pauline Maurice Taylor, 368 Stonebrook Drive, stated confusion regarding the need to rename those streets that surround the capital building (Legislative Hall), explaining her opinion that there are some things that should remain the same (William Penn and Duke of York Streets). Not supporting the word “division,” she felt that Division Street should be renamed to honor Dr. King. She advised members that streets should be named after many people in the City of Dover and the State of Delaware, both black and white. She stated that utilizing Court, William Penn, and Duke of York Streets to honor Dr. King would be putting him in the background, where only visitors would be aware of the street name, and that William Penn and the Duke of York were famous people too and part of the founding country. Reverend John G. Moore, 216 Fairfield Drive, Magnolia, (Youth Pastor at Calvary Baptist Church located at Queen and Fulton Streets in Dover), stated that this was a historic night. He advised members that at the turn of the twentieth century, a man by the name of Charles Tinley wrote the song entitled “I Will Overcome One Day,” which had since been changed to “We Shall Overcome” and became the theme song for Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. He reminded members that Dr. King believed in the “beloved community” and that this community was totally opposite from the desegregation that was occurring in the communities of Dr. King’s time. Dr. King believed that God had birthed all children with the opportunity to be all that they could be, which was the foundation of his dream. The beloved community was themed around “integration” and that no matter the color or your skin, denomination, ethnicity, etc., one would be able to achieve their dreams because they lived in a country that made it possible. Reverend Moore stated that the City of Dover has the opportunity to reflect that beloved community. He reminded members that next year will be the celebration of the 50th anniversary of the March on Washington, where Dr. King gave his most famous speech “I Have a Dream”. Referring to the word “Dream,” he advised members that he had translated this word as follows (and suggested that all citizens of this great City should do the same): D = Dedicated (to do all that we can to make sure that the City is fair and make sure that we recognize a man who has such great history in this country); R = Resilient (regardless of the challenges and differences of opinions, the citizens are able to come together in unity); E = Enthusiasm (all should have an energy to work together to see the proposal come to fruition); A =

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 10, 2012 PAGE 8 Attitude (one that is positive and with the right attitude, anything can be accomplished); and M = Motivated (all should be motivated to put differences aside and come together as a City in unity and be able to fulfill a dream so that Dr. King, from heaven above, could say “free at last, free at last, thank God Almighty, he’s free at last.” Mr. Gerald L. Rocha, Sr., 523 Schooner Court, indicated his support for renaming Court, William Penn, and Duke of York Streets to Martin Luther King, Jr. Street (or Boulevard). It was his belief that Court Street serves as a gateway into the City of Dover. He stated that the issue is racial, since Dr. King stood for all humanity, and that he was only mentioning this due to a recent comment in a local newspaper regarding an individual being Polish and questioned what recognition they would be provided. He reminded members that Dr. King stated: “God is not interested merely in the freedom of black men, brown men, and yellow men, but God is interested in the freedom of the whole human race. Creation of a society where all men will live as brothers.” Mr. Rocha stated that Dr. King stood for equality, which leads to unity. In his military capacity as Program Manager of the Dover Air Force Base Honor Guard, his primary responsibility was ensuring the return of America’s fallen heroes, those who paid the ultimate sacrifice, with dignity, honor, and respect. He stated that Dr. King was also a hero who paid the ultimate sacrifice for humanity and that, in his capacity as a community leader, he would assume the responsibility of ensuring that Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was recognized with the dignity, honor, and respect due for a man who served as a drum major for justice, peace, and righteousness for all humanity. Mr. Ali Abdul Aleem, 138 Lingo Drive, questioned how Dr. King would view the deliberations of this matter. He felt that there was an entity that sees and hopes that the best will come from all of us and come together to help each other. He reminded members that God created each one of us and, in addition to our color, God gave us capacity. Mr. Aleem felt that if Dr. King were present, he would not be squabbling, but rather encouraging everyone to come together for the greater good of all and not to view each other as black and white but rather to see each other as good, helpmates, and as brothers and sisters. He stated that the naming of a street does not give a man honor but respecting each other and naming the street (or whatever is selected) would, since it would relay a message. Reverend Frances Benson, Pastor at John Wesley AME Church, Division Street, voiced her approval for renaming Court, Duke of York, and William Penn Streets as Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard. Although she had no objections to the inclusion of the renaming of the Dover Public Library in honor of Dr. King, she felt that the Library had its own job and that the street naming would show more for the community. She urged members to take the appropriate action and approve the renaming of the streets. Council President Leary noted the receipt of correspondence (Exhibit #1) in regard to this issue. Mr. N.C. Vasuki, 215 Carnoustie Street, advised members that he supported the renaming of the streets. He stated that he serves as President of Friends of Dover Library (and the Dover Library Foundation) and that donations continued to be sought for making future improvements. He suggested that City Council take the necessary action tonight to rename the streets as recommended.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 10, 2012 PAGE 9 Ms. Dorothy Snyder, 9 Douglas Court, stated that her comments regarding the issue had already been relayed by others who supported renaming of the streets as recommended, so it was not necessary for her to speak. Reverend Rita Paige, 355 Rita Wilma Road, stated that she is a part of the Interdenominational Ministerial Alliance (IMA) and that she agreed with much of what had been said and thanked members for the process that had been taken regarding this issue. She reminded members that the initial request was to rename Division Street in honor of Dr. King and that it was felt that was the best proposal. For those who were still in favor of Division Street, she explained that no one “gave up” on the issue or agreed to compromise, but rather used wisdom in listening to those who were in opposition and to Councilman Perza’s proposal. At that time, due to less cost and impact on people, etc., it was agreed that Court, Duke of York, and William Penn Streets would be the best proposal. Noting Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., sacrificed his life to have policy and laws changed for the betterment of all humanity, she felt that there was no better place for than those streets that are located and head in the direction of the area in which laws are changed. She encouraged members to support the proposal, which she felt to be a “win-win” for all. Reverend Michael B. Rogers, 118 Springfield Way (President of the IMA), relayed appreciation for the process that had taken place in the consideration of the request. He stated that their efforts were to seek recognition for Dr. King in Dover, Delaware, and urged members to approve the recommendation to rename Court, Duke of York, and William Penn Streets as Martin Luther King Street. Reverend Richard Avant, Pastor of Calvary Baptist Church, 9 Waterwheel Circle, commended Reverend Dixon for his recent election to City Council and acknowledged that his Pastor and Bishop were in attendance. He thanked God for utilizing Councilman Perza for providing an alternative recommendation. Referring to the recent passing of Councilwoman Sophia Russell, Reverend Avant thanked members of Council for their presence during her “going home” ceremony and for the naming of a room in the Library in her honor. Mr. Bob Federwitz, 105 Revolutionary Boulevard, thanked members for the opportunity to speak and stated that he moved to the City of Dover two (2) years ago. In doing research before their move, he advised members that he and his wife were excited to learn that the City of Dover was forward thinking, particularly in the the building of a new library. He relayed support for the renaming of the streets in honor of Dr. King; however, he felt that the library should remain as the Dover Public Library. Mr. Gene Ruane, 122 Shadow Court, read the following statement into the record: In just a few weeks the Country will celebrate a holiday in honor of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Dover has a long and cherished tradition of remembering Dr. King's memory and ideals on this day. The morning celebration at the Modern Maturity Center and the

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 10, 2012 PAGE 10 noon celebration at Delaware State University are well attended and memorable events each year. However, unlike the King January holiday, which comes just once a year, a commemorative street name provides a physically permanent memorial that is present all the time. Naming a street represents a more concrete way for Dover to display its commitment to Dr. King's memory and ideals. Or, as Councilman Lynn suggested during the Legislative & Finance Committee meeting on November 13th, remembering Dr. King's memory and ideals by renaming a street in Dover will "make King's memory more visible and personal to a larger cross section of the community." Furthermore, a street touches more people than simply naming a public building or park after him. People who wouldn't go to a building or park named for Dr. King will drive on a commemorative street for business or personal reasons, especially if the street is a gateway street into the city. They will see the name at the intersections, on signs pointing to the road, and on maps. It will pop up on Map Quest and GPS systems. More people will come into contact with it. I believe that Councilman's Perza's proposal to rename Court Street to honor Dr. King's memory best satisfies the criteria that might be used to determine where King's memory is best situated or placed within the city's streetscape. First of all, Court Street connects well with existing commemorative and historic places in the city. Secondly, as Councilman Perza noted at the Nov. 13th LF&A meeting: Court Street is a major gateway into the city and the State Capitol complex. It is a "prominent, visible thoroughfare of the Capitol that serves as an entrance to the legislative corridor which attracts attention from Delawareans and Legislators from all three counties"--and I might add, "tourists" who come regularly to see the Capitol of the First State. Court Street contains a "mixture of residential neighborhoods." With the exception of a small Route 13 strip, there is no commercial development. And, as Councilman Perza further stated: "it would minimize much of the impact mentioned" in prior hearings.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 10, 2012 PAGE 11 The cost would be less than some other proposals. And, from what I read in the minutes of this same meeting, persons who have been advocating for such a commemorative street will support the Court Street proposal. For all these reasons then, I urge the Council to designate Court Street as the street to commemorate the memory and ideals of Dr. King. Ms. Gwen Elliott, 999 Sorgham Mill Road, Magnolia, stated that public libraries throughout the State of Delaware are named after their cities and felt that naming the facility anything other than its city would be distracting, explaining that individuals would question a library’s location if named something other than the city. Dover Public Library provides information as to its exact location; therefore, she favored maintaining the Dover Public Library on the map. Mr. Philemon Hill, property owner of 3728 N. DuPont Highway, felt that the majority of the community did not favor the renaming of the library; however, they did support the renaming of Court, Duke of York, and William Penn Streets as Martin Luther King Street. He stated that according to history, before this country was founded by Columbus, Indians owned everything. Someone then came over from Europe came over and started claiming land in the name of the King/Queen. It was his hope that the Duke of York or William Penn did not steal land from the Native Americans. Mr. Hill reminded members that Dr. King was a man of peace and had the desire for everyone to have opportunities. Noting that Councilman Perza had photos of his daughters on the presentation provided, he reminded members that Dr. King also had daughters before he was assassinated and was unable to raise and teach his daughters, who did; however, grow up with a family structure. He reminded members that Dr. King tried to provide this country with a conscience and had the desire for everyone to be provided the right to express their liberty. He noted that many men and women lost their lives in order to maintain freedom. He requested that all keep freedom and be free at last. Reverend Ellis Louden, 3 Michael Court (Pastor of Mt. Zion AME Church), reminded members of the significance of the issue and the life of the community. He advised members of a trip he recently took to Seattle, Washington, where there is a major thoroughfare going through Seattle named Martin Luther King Way, and the county seat for Seattle is named for Dr. King. He felt that all have come to the conclusion that Dover, Delaware, must join the many communities who have gone through these types of processes to determine how to honor a man who was important not only to a community but important to the nation and world. He stated that it was time for members of City Council to make the historic decision to allow Dover, Delaware, to join other communities across this nation, including Seattle, Washington. There being no one else wishing to speak, Council President Leary declared the public hearing closed. Mr. Lynn advised members that he was first introduced to the issue of renaming a street in honor of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. during a Towne Point/White Oak Community Homeowners' Association Meeting. After listening to a presentation provided at that time, he realized that, for his constituents,

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 10, 2012 PAGE 12 the street renaming held significantly more import to their community than merely honoring Dr. King, including the essence of social justice and a sense of self and worth. As a result, he forwarded the issue to the LF&A Committee for their review and recommendation to City Council. Acknowledging that this had not been an easy journey, Mr. Lynn relayed appreciation to Mr. Perza for his support and for crafting a compromise that would allow this overdue honor to become a reality. He stated that their Mr. Perza's and his own daughters would stand on Martin Luther King Boulevard in several years and know that their fathers had a role in making it possible. He quoted “It shouldn’t be easy to do amazing things, then everything would be amazing. It’s the things you fight for and struggle with before earning that have the greatest worth. When something is difficult to come by, you’ll do that much more to make sure it’s even harder or impossible to lose.” Mr. Lynn moved to approve changing the name of Court Street, Duke of York Street, and William Penn Street to Martin Luther King, Jr. Boulevard; including renaming the internal drive isle within the Garden Court Apartments as Court Street and also including retaining the name Court Street for the alley street segment on the south side of the current Court Street between River Road and Cowgill Street; and that plaques and/or other demarcations be installed noting the streets formally known as Duke of York and William Penn Streets. The motion was seconded by Mr. Anderson. Mr. Perza suggested that Staff Recommendation #4 be excluded so that there would be no variation for Court Street to be reflected as north or south. Although there were no objections by the maker and seconder of the motion, it was noted that the motion did not include variations for Court Street. Mr. Bonar noted that there were no residents of Court Street who spoke either in favor of or against the renaming of the streets. He stated his support for honoring Dr. King and that the naming of a street had good intent and that renaming Court Street to Dr. Martin Luther King Boulevard was a fine gesture; however, he felt that the land located at the corner of North Street and Governors Avenue should be devoted as Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Park. It was his feeling that by utilizing a park area, a diorama could be included about Dr. King (what he went through and what he taught everyone in terms of civil rights), which would educate future generations more than simply riding on a street named in honor of Dr. King. He commended Mr. Perza for submitting a compromise on the street selected for renaming in honor of Dr. King. Referring to a statement made by Mr. Daisey, Mr. Hare stated that he agreed that as the capital of First State, it was important that Dr. King be included in the City of Dover’s history. He stated that he supported the renaming of Court Street in honor of Dr. King, particularly since it serves as a gateway to Legislative Hall and the legislative part of the capital city. However, the names provided for the Duke of York and William Penn Streets also represented the City’s history. Quoting Dr. King, Mr. Hare stated that “the process needs to be as pure as the results.” It was his feeling that if the results eliminate a significant part of Delaware’s history, then the results are not as pure as the process. He reiterated his support for the renaming of Court Street; however, he explained that he would not support the renaming of the Duke of York or William Penn Streets. Mr. Hutchison relayed appreciation to all those who participated in the process. He reminded members that Dr. King gave his life for all peoples and this is a better place today because of his efforts. He noted that there is only one (1) street in the State of Delaware that is the home of the

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 10, 2012 PAGE 13 State Capital and that is Court Street, which leads up to Legislative Hall and represents the most powerful building and serves as the home of the General Assembly, Governor, and Lt. Governor, and where laws are passed for all residents. Mr. Anderson indicated his hope that tonight, City Council would conclude the process for renaming the streets in honor of Dr. King. He felt that approval of the motion would take into consideration real people and protect them from being impacted negatively and that the impact in the community would be extraordinarily positive. Referring to the public testimony, he noted that members heard an overwhelming and united sentiment regarding this issue. He stated his willingness to consider taking action for William Penn, due to his historical significance. In addition to the proposal, he stated the importance of including part of the legislative park, at least one (1) of the streets, since there was momentum not just to name a street but to continue to build upon that legacy, and he suggested possible memorials in the future. It was Mr. Anderson’s opinion that members should also approve markers in the Legislative Mall area to recognize Duke of York and William Penn so that history is not taken away but only added to the City. Responding to Mr. Lynn, Mr. Koenig felt that it would be possible to have the new street signs in place by January 15th; however, he reminded members that City staff would need to work with the Delaware Department of Transportation (DelDOT) in making these changes. He stated that the historical markers would take longer to complete. Mr. Anderson suggested that the changes be completed by January 21st - on Martin Luther King Day. Mr. Lynn moved to amend the motion so that the dedication could take place on January 21, 2013, the day the nation celebrates Dr. Martin Luther King’s birthday, seconded by Mr. Anderson. Council President Leary felt that the proposal was more than just renaming a street. Having recently spoken during the service for the late Councilwoman Russell, he was reminded of how blessed we are to be living in the world of today. It was his feeling that renaming the street was the least City Council could do to commemorate a great man and a great movement. On a call for the question, the motion to approve changing the name of Court Street, Duke of York Street, and William Penn Street to Martin Luther King, Jr. Boulevard; also including the renaming the internal drive isle within the Garden Court Apartments as Court Street and also including retaining the name Court Street for the alley street segment on the south side of the current Court Street between River Road and Cowgill Street; and that plaques and/or other demarcations identify the streets formally known as Duke of York and William Penn Streets and that the dedication take place on January 21, 2013, on the day the nation celebrates Dr. Martin Luther King’s birthday, was carried by a roll call vote of eight (8) yes (Anderson, Dixon, Lynn, Perza, Bonar, Hutchison, and Leary), one (1) no (Hare) and one (1) absent (Williams). There being no objections, Council President Leary declared a five (5) minute recess. Meeting recessed at 9:05 p.m. and reconvened at 9:16 p.m.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 10, 2012 PAGE 14 Mrs. Ann Marie Townshend, Director of Planning and Community Development, referred to Staff Recommendation #3 and questioned if the motion included renaming the streets appropriately as north and south. Mr. Bonar moved to rename Duke of York Street as Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard North and William Penn Street as Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard South, seconded by Mr. Perza and unanimously carried. Mr. Perza commended the leadership of the “alliance,” the many, many reverends that were responsible for keeping this dream of theirs alive. He also recognized Councilman Lynn, noting that although they are political opposites, they have shared the support of honoring Dr. King, and relayed appreciation for his willingness to meet with the community and his leadership in bringing this matter forward. BOARD OF ASSESSMENT APPEALS EXEMPTION REPORT - OCTOBER 25, 2012 The Board of Assessment Appeals Committee met on October 25, 2012, with Chairman Garfield presiding. Exemptions 1. B. 1. Friends of the Capitol Theater, Inc. Location: 226 S. State Street – ED05-077.09-04-22.00 Background and Analysis An appeal form was submitted to the Assessor's Office. This property was recently added to the taxable property in July 2011. In 2000, this property was approved for a10 year property tax abatement under the Dover Downtown Development Incentives. Property taxes have been paid for 2011 & 2012. Exemption Request (2012 & future billings) $2,023,500 Representing the Friends of the Capitol Theater were the following: Connie Welde Dr. William Johnston Sylvia Cowell Sandra Conner Kim Ritter Amir Mohammadi Vita Pickrum

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 10, 2012 PAGE 15 Ms. Cowell explained to the board how important the organization is to the City of Dover and its surrounding area. She told the board that the Theater had been exempt from taxes for the past 10 years and would like to be exempt from property taxes for another 10 years. Mr. Mohammadi expressed concern about the troubling economy. He explained that when the economy is in decline, so are the ticket sales for the art center. Mr. Mohammadi told the board that the expenses for the center are currently going up while the revenue is going down. Ms. Ritter went over the program which was handed out to the board members. Mr. Burns asked the board members if the Theater had the 501(c)3 status. The members explained that the theater does have the exempt status which is consistent with Wesley College and Delaware State University. Mr. Burns asked if the organization was also exempt from taxes with the county. Mrs. Welde explained that due to the fact that the organization did not have the exempt status before the year 1987, they do not qualify for the exemption with the county. She told the board about a law that kept them from automatically getting the exemption. The organization is in the process of appealing this decision. Chairman Garfinkel wanted to make sure that everybody present knew that the purpose of the Board of Assessment Appeals was to make sure the organization falls under the requirement needed to qualify for the exemption. The Assessor wanted to clarify that the tax exemption the Theater had previously was due to a 10 year Tax Abatement, which is a program the city offers to property owners who purchase property in the Downtown Dover Area. Renovations made to the property are not taxed for 10 years while in this program. This 10 year period had just come to a close. Mr. Burns asked how the art center falls within the already exempt properties within the city, such as churches, colleges, museums, or for example the Dover Art League. He wanted to make sure the board would be consistent if they decide to grant the exemption. The Assessor explained that schools and colleges are state owned and therefore are exempt. She gave examples of other organizations which are tax exempt. Mr. Burns asked the Treasurer Mrs. Welde if the theater is able to sustain itself. Mrs. Welde explained that they are applying for grants and sponsorships which help sustain events. She told the Board that Wesley College and Delaware State University contribute on a monthly basis as well. Mrs. Welde told Mr. Burns that they are sustaining, but a lot of this is based on the contribution made by the Colleges.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 10, 2012 PAGE 16 Chairman Garfinkel asked how many board members the organization had and if this was in compliance with the bylaws of the organization. He was told that there were in all, 9 members. 3 of which were associated with Delaware State University and 3 were associated with Wesley College. The board members explained that both of these colleges help financially in keeping the doors of the theater open. When asked about the rental of the room in the Theater, the applicants present, explained that while they do have rooms for rent, the income made is used to fund expenses of the Theater. They also let area schools use the rooms. Mr. Burns was concerned that in the future the theater could start making a profit on the rental of their rooms and ticket sales and would no longer qualify for the exemption. He was wondering if there were checks and balances in place to ensure the organization still falls within the requirements of the exempt qualifications. The Assessor explained that the city can request current 501(c)3 paperwork at any time to ensure the organization still falls under the exempt status. The committee recommended honoring the request for exemption but with the stipulation that the City would request proof of the 501(c)3 status periodically. By consent agenda, Mr. Bonar moved for approval of the Committee’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Hutchison and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Williams absent). A copy of the by-laws for this organization had been requested by the board members. After reviewing these by-laws, the members of the board felt that their decision to approve the request for exemption was consistent with other exempt properties within the city. 1. C.1. Rector Wardens & Vestryman of Christ Episcopal Church Location: 509 S State St. – ED05-077.09-05-45.00 Background and Analysis An appeal form was submitted to the Assessor's Office. This property was purchased by the church in April 2012. At this time, the building is vacant. Exemption Request (2012 & future billings) $125,100

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 10, 2012 PAGE 17 Rector Weaver was present for the hearing. He told the board that the church purchased the property in April of 2012 and was planning to demolish the home on the property due to the fact that it is an eyesore and unsafe. The church is not planning on building anything on this property and therefore has no plans for this property. Mr. Burns wanted to make sure that the church has no plans to use the building in the future and that the church is actively pursuing the demolition permit. Rector Weaver assured Mr. Burns that the home located on the property is unsafe and needs to be demolished. Chairman Garfinkel asked if Rector Weaver had anything else to add, when Rector Weaver explained to the board that the church is tax exempt and that all of the properties owned by the church are used for the purpose of the church. Chairman Garfinkel asked the Assessor if she had anything to add. Ms. Russell explained to the board that all the properties adjoined to the properties, which are owned by the church, are exempt from taxes. Mr. Burns told the board that he is familiar with the property and agrees with Rector Weaver, that the building was in bad shape. Chairman Garfinkel explained that the state laws require the entity to use the property for their mission and based on what had been told the property would not be used for church purposes. Rector Weaver requested the application to be withdrawn which would give him time to prepare for the hearing. The Committee recommended acceptance of the withdrawal made by Rector Weaver. By consent agenda, Mr. Bonar moved for approval of the Committee’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Hutchison and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Williams absent). By consent agenda, Mr. Bonar moved for acceptance of the Board of Assessment Appeals Exemption Report, seconded by Mr. Hutchison and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Williams absent). UTILITY COMMITTEE REPORT - DECEMBER 10, 2012 Except for the following time sensitive issue, the Utility Committee Report from December 10, 2012 will be presented to Council during their Regular Meeting of January 14, 2013 for Council’s review and consideration.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 10, 2012 PAGE 18 Renewable Energy Portfolio Standards Mr. Scott Koenig, City Manager, introduced Mr. Patrick McCullar, President and Chief Executive Officer and Ms. Kimberly Schlichting, Vice President - Administration, both of whom were representing the Delaware Municipal Electric Cooperative (DEMEC). Mr. Koenig advised members that the Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) is a state-mandated policy that obligates each retail seller of electricity to include in its resource portfolio annually increasing amounts of electricity from Qualifying Renewable Energy Resources through 2025, when it will reach the goal of 25% with at least 3% from solar renewable resources. Qualifying Renewable Energy Resources include solar electric, wind, ocean tidal, ocean thermal, fuel cells powered by renewable fuels, hydroelectric facilities with a maximum capacity of 30 megawatts (MW), sustainable biomass, anaerobic digestion, and landfill gas. Prior to 2010, municipal electric utilities were exempted from the RPS requirements. In 2010, the Delaware RPS was revised under Senate Substitute No. 1 for Senate Bill 119 to require all utilities to participate, including municipal utilities, but allowing municipal electric companies to exempt themselves provided that they develop and implement a program comparable to the Renewable Energy Portfolio Standards for ratepayers beginning in the 2013 Compliance Year (June 1, 2013 thru May 31, 2014). There was no clear standard for a “comparable plan,” but the statute imposes an “alternative compensation payment” of $25 per megawatt-hour for non-compliance in the first year, increasing to $80 per megawatt-hour by the third year, which must be passed to consumers. For the 2013 planning year, Dover must purchase 10% of its calculated load from qualified renewable resources, including 0.6% from solar photovoltaic resources, to comply with the statute. Mr. Koenig noted that DEMEC’s draft proposal encourages qualifying renewable energy resources and provides for a five (5) year planning cycle and annual and monthly compliance reconciliation for DEMEC members. DEMEC also has entered into contracts with qualifying renewable resources that will ensure compliance for its members for five (5) years, but only through planning year 2015. He stated that compliance based upon consumption would be complicated (i.e. industrial customers with loads in excess of 1,500 kWh may apply for exemption, but they must apply, it is not assumed; surplus solar capacity and facilities with Delaware-made equipment receive a multiplier, and compliance is suspended if costs increase by 3% (1% for solar)). DEMEC’s proposal would free Dover from the process of submitting its own plan. Mr. Koenig informed members that DEMEC provides full requirements service to its members, making compliance with RPS an integral part of the services. Although Dover is a member of DEMEC, it does not have the same financial obligations as the other members. Consequently, it would be necessary for Dover to enter into additional agreements with DEMEC concerning the scope of services, planning obligations, acquisition responsibility when DEMEC acquires qualified renewable resources, and compensation to DEMEC for the term of the renewable resource contract. These and other terms would be negotiated in the months ahead. Mr. Koenig indicated that this request for action was limited solely to the joint filing of a plan. Mr. Koenig indicated that the City evaluated whether to file a separate compliance plan or to join with DEMEC. He advised members that, on the assumption that the RPS and the “circuit breaker” to protect against higher costs would remain in effect, conversations with The Energy Authority (TEA), DEMEC, and Mr. Kirk Betts, the City’s Utility Attorney, led staff to conclude that the City

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 10, 2012 PAGE 19 of Dover should join in DEMEC’s proposed RPS Plan as outlined in the Municipal Electric Utilities Renewable Portfolio Standard Plan. Staff recommended that the City join the DEMEC Renewable Portfolio Standard Plan. Mr. McCullar stated that he was present to discuss the RPS plan and the possibility of DEMEC acting as agent for the City of Dover in the implementation of the filing and compliance with the plan. He complimented Mr. Koenig on his summary of the plan and noted one (1) correction, advising members that municipal plans do not have a non-compliance penalty payment. He explained that DEMEC was given flexibility by the General Assembly to design plans and this was being done with the goal of having a plan that is fairly comparable to the plan mandated for Delmarva Power. Mr. McCullar noted that the plan would seek to minimize the impact on DEMEC’s rate payers and to stay below the circuit breakers that are built into the legislation defining RPS (1% cost of retail sales on an annual basis for solar and 3% for non-solar, such as wind and other renewables). He indicated that the plan distributed to the local regulatory authorities (municipalities) must be adopted by the local regulatory authority, and filed with the General Assembly and the Delaware Energy Office. From that point, there is an obligation to meet the compliance targets which are determined on an annual basis as a percentage of retail electric sales; for example, if a set amount of kWh is generated in a year, a schedule determines the percentage of those kWh’s that must come from Qualifying Renewable Energy Resources, and there is a subset of solar renewable energy portfolio units. Mr. McCullar advised members that a five (5) year time frame was chosen for DEMEC’s compliance plan because this is the duration of the State energy plan and also because it was felt that conditions in the electric industry and the persuasions of the General Assembly may change, causing modifications to the RPS law. He noted that DEMEC would be responsible for the compliance obligation for the other eight (8) municipal electric utilities involved. He indicated that the plan was designed in anticipation that the City of Dover would approach DEMEC to be its agent and DEMEC was prepared to do so. Mr. McCullar noted that DEMEC currently had a partial requirements agreement with the City of Dover for certain activities and that amendments would have to be made to define the responsibilities and payment obligations, should DEMEC (as the agent for Dover and the other eight (8) municipal electric utilities) acquire renewable energy resources or build them to create a supply that meets compliance obligations. Responding to Mr. Hutchison, Mr. McCullar stated that DEMEC’s contract with the City would extend through 2025, since it was known that there was an absolute compliance obligation that 25% of DEMEC’s energy resources come from renewables at that time. Decisions would be made in five (5) year increments regarding what “the curve would look like” to meet the 25%. If the DEMEC Board of Directors (including Mr. Koenig) were to decide that a project must be built or a contract for output from a particular project to meet the compliance obligation in 2025 was necessary, an agreement would be put in place that would allow the City of Dover to participate in that economic project and have part of their compliance obligation met. In response to Mr. Bonar, Mr. McCullar reassured members that Mr. Koenig would be a voting member of the DEMEC Board of Directors. He stated that no legislative approval would be needed to amend the original plan if the City were to enter into the agreement with DEMEC. He explained that the municipal plans are viewed as nine (9) separate plans, since the legislation requires that each local regulatory authority have a plan; however, the DEMEC Board agreed that the best approach

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 10, 2012 PAGE 20 for all concerned was to have a unified plan with nine (9) separate reporting categories. He noted that the composition of the electric customer base is different in each community. Mr. McCullar indicated that industrial customers with a 1,500 KW demand can exempt themselves. He stated that regulations had very recently been changed to state that industrial customers are automatically exempt and need not apply. Mr. McCullar noted that DEMEC would advise each community of its annual sales and the percentage of these sales that come from qualifying industrial customers, and this would be subtracted from their obligation. He informed members that the City of Dover has quite a few qualifying customers (as does Newark); however, the Towns of Clayton and Smyrna have very few; therefore, a higher percentage of their total sales would be subject to compliance. As the annual compliance reporting is performed, DEMEC would make calculations to determine the actual year-to-year obligations and show how this was met with qualifying resources. In response to Mr. Bonar, Mr. McCullar confirmed that DEMEC would be responsible if they were unable to meet the specified goals; however, he noted that “there is very little in the plan” that allows for a penalty and that new legislation would have to be passed to impose a penalty on DEMEC. Noting that the City’s solar plan ran “full bore,” generating 3% of the City’s electric supply during the previous summer, Mr. Snaman inquired about sources of renewable energy other than wind and solar. Responding, Mr. McCullar noted that there was a variety of sources, including geothermal, heated water solar, tidal, and small hydro energy, and that wind produces the most efficiency. DEMEC had a contract for wind energy for a project proposed by Bluewater Wind; however, this facility was never built. Mr. McCullar noted that DEMEC worked closely with the University of Delaware and that Professor Willett Kempton, from the University, performed a number of studies on wind resources in Delaware and discovered that there was not enough efficiency in wind resources to build wind farms in the State. He advised members that one (1) windmill was running in Lewes (a University of Delaware project) and, although it receives the benefit of offshore winds, its efficiency is “not too great.” He explained that DEMEC recently had Duke Energy build a 69 MW commercial wind farm operation on top of a mountain ridge in north central Pennsylvania where there was very good wind efficiency and DEMEC will receive 100% of the energy from this facility, which will serve the organization’s non-solar renewable energy credit compliance for quite a few years into the future. In response to Mr. Snaman regarding plans for other renewable energy projects, Mr. Koenig explained that the City was being approached by various solar developers (at least two (2) specifically) and stated that the Renewable Portfolio Standard Plan must be put in place before additional solar construction was considered. He noted that this was likely to come up in the future. Responding to Mr. Snaman, Mr. McCullar stated that natural gas did not qualify as renewable energy. He indicated that the General Assembly allowed for a fuel cell powered by natural gas and that carbon-based resources would not qualify. Mr. McCullar stated that DEMEC’s plan as the administrator would be to identify the most economic and efficient projects that can be put in with the goal of creating the least burden possible on rate payers while maintaining compliance.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 10, 2012 PAGE 21 The Committee recommended that the City join the Delaware Municipal Energy Cooperative (DEMEC) Renewable Portfolio Standard Plan, as recommended by staff. During the Council Meeting, at the request of Mr. Bonar, Mr. Koenig briefed members regarding this matter. Mr. Bonar moved for approval of the Committee’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Hutchison. Mr. Anderson stated his opinion that the RPS mandates that have been opposed were wrong. He stated that the idea that 25% of the State’s energy is going to come from renewable sources was a fantasy. He explained that this idea would not come to fruition unless there was rationing and cost rationing. He felt that the State should come to reality and noted that the RPS were already costing the rate payers of the State a great deal of money and that Delaware has some of the highest electric rates in the country due to these mandates that were wrong. Responding to Mr. Lynn, Mr. Koenig stated that he was not aware of any statutory financial impact should the City elect not to join the Delaware Municipal Energy Cooperative Renewable Portfolio Standard Plan. However, he stated that the City was required to file a plan with the State Energy Office and that staff had elected to do so by joining the Delaware Municipal Energy Cooperative Renewable Portfolio Standard Plan since it would put all the State’s municipalities on the same level “playing field.” Although he understood the objections and concerns regarding the RPS, he reminded members that it was currently the law. He felt that the City could make rational arguments to amend the law but, at this time, the City needed to abide by the current law as written. Mr. Koenig assured members that approval of the Committee’s recommendation would put the City in compliance with the law. He also indicated that the Governor’s Office had been very clear that the municipal electric rates were a concern. Concurring with Mr. Anderson, Mr. Bonar stated that this particular action would put the City in line with the rules and regulations mandated by the legislature. He felt that although the City may not have financial repercussions at the present time, if the City did not join the other municipalities and file along with DEMEC according to the standards, the legislators could, at a later date, decide to enact penalties that may have an adverse impact on the City in general. Mr. Anderson stated that although there may be a rational basis to approve the recommendation, he also believes there was a rational basis for sending a message, even a temporary one, in hopes that the legislators would “wake up.” In response to Mr. Hare, Mrs. Mitchell explained that the law requires the municipality to show that a plan has been filed and approved by the municipality’s governing body. She stated that if City Council approved the Committee’s recommendation, the City would have met the law. The Plan had been prepared to meet the standards and had been prepared on behalf of all utilities. She also indicated that action to meet the law must be accomplished by January 1, 2013.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 10, 2012 PAGE 22 On a call for the question by Mr. Hare, the motion to approve the Committee’s recommendation for acceptance of staff's recommendation that the City join the Delaware Municipal Energy Cooperative (DEMEC) Renewable Portfolio Standard Plan was carried by a roll call vote of six (6) yes (Dixon, Lynn, Bonar, Hare, Hutchison, and Leary), two (2) no (Anderson and Perza), and one (1) absent (Williams). MONTHLY REPORTS - OCTOBER 2012 By motion of Mr. Bonar, seconded by Mr. Hutchison, the following monthly reports were accepted by consent agenda: Budget City Assessor City Manager City Planner Dover Fire Department Economic Development Office EVALUATION OF BIDS - ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING SERVICES Mr. Scott Koenig, City Manager, advised members that the City of Dover Electric Department was continuously working on various electric system upgrades which include future capacity and future growth projects. These projects require numerous hours of engineering design, as well as value engineering and estimating. Earlier this year, staff solicited Requests for Qualifications (RFQs) to provide electrical engineering services on a project by project (on-call) basis. Seven (7) submissions were received, reviewed, and analyzed by City staff. After careful review, staff felt that both Pike Energy Solutions and Power Consulting Engineers (PCE) had all of the necessary experience and staff to perform any of the requested work without using sub-consultants. In light of the number of projects to be undertaken in the Capital Investment Plan (CIP), staff felt it would be in the City’s best interest to award a contract to both firms. Mr. Koenig indicated that this would allow the Electric Department the flexibility to choose one (1) of the firms based on their availability, expertise, and workload on a project by project basis. The total cost over the term of each contract would likely exceed $25,000; however, the costs would be reflected in the appropriate project budget or line item. He assured members that all awards under this contract that exceed $25,000 would be brought back to City Council for award on the individual project basis. Staff recommended awarding a three (3) year contract with two (2) one (1) year extensions to Pike Energy Solutions, LLC and Power Consulting Engineers (PCE) per their rate sheets included in the referenced RFQ. Responding to Mr. Perza, Mr. Koenig stated that approval of the recommendation would essentially award two (2) separate contracts; however, he reiterated that all awards under the contracts that exceed $25,000 would be brought back for Council’s review and approval.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 10, 2012 PAGE 23 Mr. Bonar moved for approval of staff’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Anderson and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Williams absent). EVALUATION OF BIDS - WESLEY COLLEGE STREETSCAPE ENHANCEMENT, PHASE I Mr. Scott Koenig, City Manager, reminded members that Wesley College had requested a new parking lot on their campus, located on 22, 28 and 34 South State Street. The new parking lot would also include demolition of an existing accessory building, storm sewer installation, and curb installation. An easement was dedicated to the property for public use of the parking lot, thus allowing use of Community Transportation Funds (CTF). However, he noted that certain improvements within the project fall outside of the easement area. This portion of the work would be paid for by the City of Dover with reimbursement by Wesley College. The City was in receipt of a letter dated July 25, 2012 from Dr. Johnston indicating that Wesley College would reimburse the City. Mr. Koenig stated that the total amount anticipated to be reimbursed is $4,083.98. The Department of Public Works created bid documents and worked with the CTF Division of the Delaware Department of Transportation (DelDOT) to acquire the proper funding from local legislators to fund this project. Staff recommended approval of the low bid submitted by Corrado Construction Co., in the amount of $96,976.57. Mr. Bonar moved for approval of staff’s recommendation, seconded by Mr. Anderson and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Williams absent). APPOINTMENTS RECOMMENDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT LEARY Council President Leary requested approval of the following appointments: Parks, Recreation, and Community Enhancement Committee - Terms to Expire May 2013 David L. Bonar, Chairman (to fill the unexpired term of Sophia R. Russell) Wallace R. Dixon (to fill the unexpired term of David L. Bonar - appointed as Chairman) Safety Advisory and Transportation Committee - Term to Expire May 2013 Wallace R. Dixon (to fill the unexpired term of Sophia R. Russell) By consent agenda, Mr. Bonar moved for approval of the appointments as recommended by Council President Leary, seconded by Mr. Hutchison and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Williams absent). FINAL READING - PROPOSED ORDINANCE #2012-23 The First Reading of Proposed Ordinance #2012-23 - FY13 Budget Revisions was accomplished during the Council Meeting of November 26, 2012. Mr. Bonar moved that the Final Reading of the proposed ordinance be acknowledged by title only, seconded by Mr. Dixon and unanimously carried.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 10, 2012 PAGE 24 Mrs. Donna Mitchell, Controller/Treasurer, reviewed those changes that would be incorporated into the FY13 Budget as a result of the adoption of Ordinance #2012-23. Mr. Bonar moved for adoption of Ordinance #2012-23 (Exhibit #2), seconded by Mr. Dixon and carried by a unanimous roll call vote (Williams absent). COUNCIL MEMBERS ANNOUNCEMENTS Mayor Carey congratulated Councilman Dixon on his recent election to serve as a Fourth District Councilman. He also relayed appreciation for the work done by everyone on the renaming of streets to honor Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Mayor Carey wished all a very Merry Christmas and a Happy Holiday Season. Mr. Perza advised members that he traveled around the City in the evening to enjoy the holiday displays and was very impressed with those located on Oak Drive, Yearsley Avenue, South Bradford Street, and Lotus Street (all located within the Second District). Mr. Hare noted the difficulty getting across streets while traveling through the City on Loockerman Street due to those who are attempting to make left-hand turns onto Governors Avenue, etc. He suggested that this matter be referred to the Safety Advisory and Transportation Committee to consider the possibility of prohibiting left-hand turns during certain time periods. Council President Leary reminded everyone that the next regularly scheduled Council Meeting would be held on January 14, 2013; however, he noted that a Council Workshop had been scheduled to be held on January 7, 2013 to discuss financial issues. Council President Leary wished all a Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays and suggested that they enjoy the season with their family and friends. Without objection, Council President Leary declared the meeting adjourned at 9:46 p.m. TRACI A. McDOWELL CITY CLERK All orders, ordinances, and resolutions adopted by City Council during their Regular Meeting of December 10, 2012, are hereby approved. CARLETON E. CAREY, SR. MAYOR /TM/jg S:\AGENDAS-MINUTES-PACKETS\Council-Minutes\2012\12-10-2012.wpd Exhibits Exhibit #1 - Correspondence - Renaming of Streets in Honor of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Exhibit #2 - Ordinance #2012-23 - FY13 Budget Revisions

Exhibit #1 Council Meeting December 10, 2012

Exhibit #2 Council Meeting December 10, 2012 CITY OF DOVER ORDINANCE # 2012-23 2012-2013 BUDGET ORDINANCES GENERAL FUND - REVENUES AND BUDGET BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOVER, IN COUNCIL MET: The amount hereinafter named aggregating Thirty Eight Million, Five Hundred Four Thousand, Seven Hundred dollars ($38,504,700) or so much thereof as may be necessary are hereby appropriated from current revenues and other funds for the use by several departments of the Municipal Government for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2012 and ending June 30, 2013: ORIGINAL REVISED 2012/13 2012/13 BUDGET BUDGET RECEIPTS BEGINNING BALANCE 2,666,600 2,734,400 FINES AND POLICE REVENUE 668,000 668,000 INVESTMENT INCOME 75,000 75,000 LIBRARY REVENUES 66,200 66,200 KENT COUNTY BOOK REIMBURSEMENT 405,900 405,900 BUSINESS LICENSES 1,455,000 1,455,000 PERMITS AND OTHER FEES 1,053,300 1,053,300 MISCELLANEOUS CHARGES 55,500 55,500 POLICE EXTRA DUTY 494,400 494,400 PROPERTY TAXES 10,997,400 11,063,400 BID REVENUE 51,600 51,600 RECREATION REVENUE 130,000 130,000 FRANCHISE FEE 550,000 550,000 SANITATION FEES 2,690,200 2,690,200 RENT REVENUE - GARRISON FARM 62,000 62,000 COURT OF CHANCERY FEES 753,800 753,800 RECEIPTS SUBTOTAL 19,508,300 19,574,300 INTERFUND SERVICE RECEIPTS INTRAFUND SERVICE RECEIPTS W/WW 1,104,600 1,104,600 INTRAFUND SERVICE RECEIPTS ELECTRIC 3,224,500 3,224,500 INTERFUND SERVICE RECEIPTS SUBTOTAL 4,329,100 4,329,100 GRANTS: POLICE RELATED/EXTRA DUTY 85,000 85,000 POLICE PENSION GRANT 500,000 500,000 GREEN ENERGY GRANT 98,500 98,500 MISC GRANT REVENUE 25,000 25,000 GRANTS SUBTOTAL 708,500 708,500 TRANSFERS FROM: TRANSFER TAX 1,370,000 1,370,000 MUNICIPAL STREET AID 527,400 527,400 CIVIL TRAFFIC PENALTIES 750,000 750,000 WATER/WASTEWATER 500,000 500,000 ELECTRIC 8,000,000 8,000,000 VERIZON AND CI RESERVES 11,000 11,000 TRANSFERS FROM SUBTOTAL 11,158,400 11,158,400 TOTAL REVENUES 35,704,300 35,770,300 TOTAL BEGINNING BALANCE & REVENUE 38,370,900 38,504,700

2 of 11 GENERAL FUND EXPENSE SUMMARY ORIGINAL REVISED 2012/13 2012/13 BUDGET BUDGET DEPARTMENT EXPENSES: CITY CLERK 326,900 326,900 COUNCIL 114,200 114,200 TAX ASSESSOR 187,500 187,500 FIRE 688,300 688,300 GROUNDS MAINTENANCE 993,300 1,008,100 LIBRARY 1,250,200 1,250,200 RECREATION 713,400 715,400 LIFE SAFETY 469,900 471,200 CODE ENFORCEMENT 293,100 295,100 PLANNING 410,300 412,300 INSPECTIONS 592,200 596,900 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 231,100 231,100 POLICE 13,195,200 13,195,200 POLICE EXTRA DUTY 579,400 579,400 STREETS 756,700 772,200 SANITATION 2,140,700 2,152,800 CITY MANAGER 420,000 420,000 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 642,700 642,700 FINANCE 879,500 879,500 PUBLIC SERVICES - ADMINISTRATION 468,600 472,600 FACILITIES MANAGEMENT 678,800 683,500 CENTRAL SERVICES 576,900 578,200 FLEET MAINTENANCE 712,700 716,100 CUSTOMER SERVICE 901,200 901,200 HUMAN RESOURCES 319,700 319,700 MAYOR 82,400 82,400 DEPARTMENT SUBTOTALS 28,624,900 28,692,700 OTHER EXPENDITURES: DEBT SERVICE 624,200 624,200 CONTRIBUTION TO DDP 180,000 180,000 MISCELLANEOUS GRANT RELATED EXPENSES 25,000 25,000 INSURANCE 600,000 600,000 RETIREES HEALTH CARE 1,620,600 1,620,600 OTHER EMPLOYMENT EXPENSES 463,400 463,400 GENERAL PENSION UNFUNDED LIABILITY 1,310,500 1,310,500 POLICE PENSION FUND - STATE GRANT 500,000 500,000 POLICE PENSION UNFUNDED LIABILITY 95,000 95,000 UNCOLLECTIBLES - TRASH AND OTHER 10,000 10,000 STREET LIGHTS 869,700 869,700 OTHER EXPENSE SUBTOTAL 6,298,400 6,298,400 TRANSFERS TRANSFER TO CAPITAL FUND - PROJECTS 613,400 613,400 TRANSFERS SUBTOTAL 613,400 613,400 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 35,536,700 35,536,700 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE 2,834,200 2,968,000 TOTAL BUDGET BALANCE & EXPENDITURES 38,370,900 38,504,700

3 of 11 GOVERNMENTAL CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND SUMMARY ORIGINAL REVISED 2012/13 2012/13 BUDGET BUDGET BEGINNING BALANCE 294,400 241,100 BEGINNING BALANCE - Library Project - (95,500) REVENUES STATE GRANTS - Library 884,200 1,746,000 PROPOSED BOND/BANK PROCEEDS - Library 317,500 648,500 INCOME FROM SALE OF ASSETS 1,200,000 1,200,000 LIBRARY FOUNDATION DONATIONS - 71,000 KENT COUNTY CONTRIBUTION - 250,000 FRIENDS OF THE LIBRARY DONATION - 102,400 DEMEC GRANT - 166,700 PROPOSED BANK PROCEEDS - Streets 2,000,000 2,000,000 PROPOSED BANK PROCEEDS - Garrison 2,000,000 - STATE GRANTS - DEMA 108,000 158,000 POLICE GRANTS 33,800 33,800 MUNICIPAL STREET AID CAPITAL CONTRIBUTION - 132,200 TRANSFER FROM FUTURE CAPACITY RESERVE - 2,000,000 TRANSFER FROM GENERAL FUND 613,400 613,400 TOTAL REVENUES 7,156,900 9,122,000 TOTAL BEGINNING BALANCE & REVENUES 7,451,300 9,267,600 EXPENDITURES FIRE 238,500 238,500 GROUNDS MAINTENANCE 112,000 112,000 LIBRARY 2,535,000 4,089,100 RECREATION 30,000 30,000 POLICE 197,000 197,000 STREETS 1,974,000 2,144,200 SANITATION 150,000 150,000 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 57,000 107,000 FACILITIES MANAGEMENT 381,000 381,000 MAYOR 33,000 33,000 DEPARTMENT SUBTOTAL 5,707,500 7,481,800 TRANSFERS & MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES BOND/LOAN ISSUANCE COST 56,000 - TRANSFER TO COMMUNITY TRANS FUND 1,606,700 1,606,700 TRANSFERS & MISCELLANEOUS SUBTOTAL 1,662,700 1,606,700 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 7,370,200 9,088,500 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE 81,100 179,100 TOTAL BUDGET BALANCE & EXPENDITURES 7,451,300 9,267,600

4 of 11 WATER/WASTEWATER FUND SUMMARY ORIGINAL REVISED 2012/13 2012/13 BUDGET BUDGET BEGINNING BALANCE - WATER 865,100 884,600 BEGINNING BALANCE - WASTEWATER 853,000 867,800 BEGINNING BALANCE - KCSA (553,500) (553,500) TOTAL BEGINNING BALANCES 1,164,600 1,198,900 BASE REVENUE: WATER FEES 4,730,700 4,730,700 WASTEWATER FEES 3,834,600 3,834,600 WASTEWATER ADJUSTMENT FEES 3,090,800 3,090,800 GROUNDWATER INFLOW ADJUSTMENT 1,257,600 1,257,600 WATER TANK SPACE LEASING 313,500 313,500 SEWER IMPACT FEES 317,000 317,000 WATER IMPACT FEES 350,000 350,000 INTEREST - WATER 8,700 8,700 INTEREST - WASTEWATER 17,100 17,100 MISCELLANEOUS SERVICE FEE 77,000 77,000 TOTAL REVENUES 13,997,000 13,997,000 TOTAL BEGINNING BALANCE & REVENUES 15,161,600 15,195,900 DIRECT EXPENSES: ENGINEERING & INSPECTION 597,900 601,900 WATER CONSTRUCTION 345,700 352,400 WATER DEPARTMENT 408,200 415,000 WATER TREATMENT PLANT 1,522,600 1,535,400 WASTEWATER DEPARTMENT 993,000 997,000 DIRECT EXPENDITURE SUBTOTAL 3,867,400 3,901,700 OTHER EXPENSES: DEBT SERVICE - WATER 532,100 532,100 DEBT SERVICE - WASTEWATER 731,500 731,500 RETIREES HEALTH CARE 220,000 220,000 OTHER EMPLOYMENT EXPENSES 16,200 16,200 PENSION UNFUNDED LIABILITY 309,800 309,800 KENT COUNTY TREATMENT CHARGE 3,600,000 3,600,000 INTRAFUND SERVICE FEES 1,235,400 1,235,400 UNCOLLECTIBLES 5,000 5,000 INVENTORY/FIXED ASSET WRITEOFFS 5,000 5,000 OTHER EXPENSES SUBTOTAL 6,655,000 6,655,000 TRANSFER TO: GENERAL FUND FROM WATER 250,000 250,000 GENERAL FUND FROM WASTEWATER 250,000 250,000 WATER IMP AND EXT 1,700,000 1,700,000 WASTEWATER IMP AND EXT 1,200,000 1,200,000 CAPITAL ASSET RESERVE WATER 70,000 70,000 CAPITAL ASSET RESERVE WASTEWATER 22,000 22,000 TRANSFER TO SUBTOTAL 3,492,000 3,492,000 TOTAL EXPENSES 14,014,400 14,048,700 BUDGET BALANCES CURRENT YEAR BALANCE WATER 482,700 482,700 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE WASTEWATER 664,500 664,500 SUBTOTAL CURRENT YEAR BALANCES 1,147,200 1,147,200 TOTAL BUDGET BALANCES & EXPENSES 15,161,600 15,195,900

5 of 11 WATER/WASTEWATER IMPROVEMENT & EXTENSION FUND ORIGINAL REVISED 2012/13 2012/13 BUDGET BUDGET BEGINNING BALANCE - WATER 3,071,800 3,811,200 BEGINNING BALANCE - WASTEWATER 1,013,600 2,641,000 TOTAL BEGINNING BALANCES 4,085,400 6,452,200 REVENUES BOND PROCEEDS - WATER - 2013 ISSUE 2,000,000 2,000,000 BOND PROCEEDS - WASTEWATER - 2013 ISSUE 2,000,000 2,000,000 TRANS FR OPERATING FUND FOR WATER 1,700,000 1,700,000 TRANS FR OPERATING FUND FOR WASTEWATER 1,200,000 1,200,000 TRANSFER FR WATER IMPACT FEE RESERVE 250,000 250,000 TRANSFER FR WASTEWATER IMPACT FEE RES 300,000 300,000 PROCEEDS FROM SALE OF ASSETS - - INTEREST INCOME 25,000 25,000 TOTAL REVENUES 7,475,000 7,475,000 TOTAL BEGINNING BALANCES & REVENUES 11,560,400 13,927,200 EXPENSES WATER 5,140,000 5,762,600 WASTEWATER 3,817,300 5,798,400 WATER TREATMENT PLANT 24,100 24,100 WATER CONSTRUCTION 31,000 31,000 ENGINEERING & INSPECTION 23,400 23,400 BOND ISSUANCE COST & DEBT SERVICE RESERVE 344,000 344,000 TOTAL EXPENSES 9,379,800 11,983,500 CUREENT YEAR BALANCE - WATER 1,655,500 1,772,300 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE - WASTEWATER 525,100 171,400 TOTAL ENDING BUDGET BALANCES 2,180,600 1,943,700 TOTAL BUDGET BALANCES & EXPENSES 11,560,400 13,927,200

6 of 11 ELECTRIC REVENUE FUND SUMMARY ORIGINAL REVISED 2012/13 2012/13 BUDGET BUDGET BEGINNING BALANCE 7,184,000 7,201,500 BASE REVENUE: DIRECT SALES TO CUSTOMER 85,071,400 85,071,400 UTILITY TAX 1,595,200 1,595,200 MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE 850,700 850,700 RENT REVENUE 225,000 225,000 GREEN ENERGY 129,000 129,000 INTEREST EARNINGS 107,800 107,800 TRANSFER FROM RATE STABILIZATION 5,400,000 5,400,000 INTRAFUND SERVICE RECEIPTS W/WW 130,800 130,800 TOTAL REVENUES 93,509,900 93,509,900 TOTAL BEGINNING BALANCE & REVENUES 100,693,900 100,711,400 EXPENSES: POWER SUPPLY - HEDGED ENERGY 39,468,900 39,468,900 PJM CHARGES - PURCHASED ENERGY 17,508,300 13,752,300 PJM CHARGES - TRANSMISSION & FEEES - 3,756,000 SOLAR ENERGY 1,414,500 1,414,500 SOLAR RENEWAL ENERGY CREDITS - 351,600 CAPACITY CHARGES - LOAD 12,564,800 12,564,800 POWER SUPPLY MANAGEMENT 996,000 996,000 SUB-TOTAL POWER SUPPLY 71,952,500 72,304,100 PLANT OPERATIONS 5,914,900 5,914,900 GENERATIONS FUELS 586,000 586,000 PJM SPOT MARKET ENERGY - (1,124,300) PJM CREDITS (1,199,700) (427,000) CAPACITY CREDITS (14,318,600) (14,318,600) GENERATION SUBTOTAL (9,017,400) (9,369,000) POWER SUPPLY & GENERATION SUBTOTAL 62,935,100 62,935,100 DIRECT EXPENDITURES TRANSMISSION/DISTRIBUTION 3,223,600 3,233,700 ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING 1,163,900 1,171,300 ADMINISTRATION 501,200 501,200 METER READING 212,500 212,500 SYSTEMS OPERATIONS 517,600 517,600 DIRECT EXPENDITURE SUBTOTALS 5,618,800 5,636,300 OTHER EXPENSES: UTILITY TAX 1,595,200 1,595,200 ALLOW FOR UNCOLLECTIBLES 150,000 150,000 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES - RFP'S 190,000 190,000 RETIREES HEALTH CARE 696,500 696,500 OTHER EMPLOYMENT EXPENSES 157,900 157,900 TRANSFER TO PENSION UNFUNDED LIABILITY 1,074,200 1,074,200 GREEN ENERGY PAYMENT TO DEMEC 129,000 129,000 INTRAFUND SERVICE FEES 3,224,500 3,224,500 INTEREST ON DEPOSITS 35,000 35,000 INVENTORY WRITE OFFS 175,000 175,000 DEBT SERVICE 3,323,600 3,323,600 OTHER EXPENSES SUBTOTAL 10,750,900 10,750,900 TRANSFER TO: IMPROVEMENT & EXTENSION 3,500,000 3,500,000 GENERAL FUND 8,000,000 8,000,000 TRANSFER TO SUBTOTAL 11,500,000 11,500,000 TOTAL EXPENSES 90,804,800 90,822,300 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE 9,889,100 9,889,100 TOTAL BUDGET BALANCE & EXPENSES 100,693,900 100,711,400

7 of 11 ELECTRIC IMPROVEMENT & EXTENSION FUND SUMMARY ORIGINAL REVISED 2012/13 2012/13 BUDGET BUDGET BEGINNING BALANCE 2,714,600 3,534,600 REVENUE TRANSFER FROM ELECTRIC 3,500,000 3,500,000 TRANSFER FROM FUTURE CAPACITY RESERVE 550,000 550,000 INTEREST EARNINGS 40,700 40,700 TOTAL REVENUES 4,090,700 4,090,700 TOTAL BEGINNING BALANCE & REVENUE 6,805,300 7,625,300 EXPENSES ELECTRIC GENERATION 1,441,300 1,786,600 TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION 596,000 896,000 ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING 1,932,700 1,942,800 TOTAL EXPENSES 3,970,000 4,625,400 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE 2,835,300 2,999,900 TOTAL BUDGET BALANCE & EXPENSES 6,805,300 7,625,300

8 of 11 MUNICIPAL STREET AID ORIGINAL REVISED 2012/13 2012/13 BUDGET BUDGET BEGINNING BALANCE 100 132,200 REVENUES STATE GRANTS 527,400 659,600 TOTAL REVENUES 527,400 659,600 TOTAL BEGINNING BALANCE & REVENUES 527,500 791,800 EXPENDITURES STREET IMPROVEMENTS - 264,300 TRANSFER TO GENERAL FUND 527,400 527,400 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 527,400 791,700 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE 100 100 TOTAL BUDGET BALANCE & EXPENDITURES 527,500 791,800

9 of 11 LIBRARY GRANT ORIGINAL REVISED 2012/13 2012/13 BUDGET BUDGET BEGINNING BALANCE - 30,000 REVENUE STATE GRANT 280,500 280,500 TOTAL REVENUE 280,500 280,500 TOTAL BEGINNING BALANCE & REVENUE 280,500 310,500 EXPENDITURES FURNITURE/FIXTURES 52,300 62,900 PROGRAM EXPENSES/SUPPLIES 15,300 17,100 OFFICE SUPPLIES 15,000 15,000 PRINTING & DUPLICATING 9,500 9,800 POSTAGE 200 200 BOOKS 95,000 95,000 COMPUTER HARDWARE 20,000 20,000 AUDIO VISUAL SUPPLIES 65,000 65,000 TRAINING/CONF/FOOD/TRAV 4,000 4,000 OFF EQP/REPAIRS & MAINT 4,200 4,200 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 280,500 293,200 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE - 17,300 TOTALS 280,500 310,500

10 of 11 POLICE GRANTS ORIGINAL REVISED 2012/13 2012/13 BUDGET BUDGET PRIOR YEAR BALANCE - 178,400 REVENUE GRANTS RECEIVED 382,600 429,400 INTEREST INCOME - - TOTAL REVENUE 382,600 429,400 TOTALS 382,600 607,800 EXPENDITURES FURNITURE & FIXTURES - 15,000 OFFICE & COMPUTER SUPP - - PHOTO EQUIPT & SUPPLIES - - POLICE EQUIPT & PROG SUPP 64,000 87,000 UNIFORMS & BODY ARMOR - - TECHNOLOGY EQUIPMENT 57,000 57,000 BUILDING IMPROVEMENTS - - CELL PHONE CHARGES 15,000 15,000 TRAINING 17,000 27,000 AUDIT FEES 1,000 1,000 OTHER EQUIPMENT - 25,000 VEHICLE PURCHASE 10,500 10,500 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 164,500 222,500 OTHER FINANCING USES OPERATING TRANSFERS-OUT 218,100 242,400 TOTAL FINANCING USES 218,100 242,400 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE - 142,900 TOTALS 382,600 607,800 THE ABOVE BUDGET INCLUDES THE POLICE GRANTS FUND, USDOJ BYRNE GRANTS FUND AS WELL AS THE OTHER FEDERAL POLICE

11 of 11 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) ORIGINAL REVISED 2012/13 2012/13 BUDGET BUDGET BEGINNING BALANCE - 16,200 REVENUE FEDERAL GRANT 235,300 317,200 TOTAL REVENUE 235,300 317,200 TOTAL BEGINNING BALANCE & REVENUE 235,300 333,400 EXPENDITURES SALARIES 38,300 38,300 FICA TAXES 2,900 2,900 WORKER'S COMPENSATION 200 200 PENSION 2,300 2,300 OPEB 3,300 3,300 COMMUNITY REVITAL. INFRASTRUCTURE - 60,100 CLOSING COST & DOWNPAYMENT PROGRAM 30,000 36,000 DOVER INTERFAITH MINISTRY 27,500 34,600 FIRST STATE RES CONSV & DEV 35,000 41,900 ELIZABETH W MURPHEY SCHOOL 20,000 20,000 NCALL RESEARCH 7,800 7,800 SERENITY PLACE 28,000 28,000 MILFORD HOUSING H/O REHAB PROGRAM 40,000 41,800 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 235,300 317,200 CURRENT YEAR BALANCE - 16,200 TOTALS 235,300 333,400 ADOPTED: DECEMBER 10, 2012 Actions History: December 10, 2012 Final Reading - Council November 27, 2012 First Reading - Council November 13, 2012 Considered by Legislative, Finance and Administration Committee